+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the...

Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the...

Date post: 19-Jul-2020
Category:
Upload: others
View: 1 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
53
1 Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the maintenance of species-rich hay meadows: a 12 year fertilizer and lime experiment Francis W. Kirkham 1* , Robert M. Dunn 2 , Jerry R.B. Tallowin 2 , Anne Bhogal 3 , Brian J. Chambers 3 and Richard D. Bardgett 4 1 Ecological Research & Consultancy, Far View, Nymet Rowland, Crediton, Devon EX17 6AL, UK; 2 Rothamsted Research, North Wyke, Okehampton, Devon EX20 2SB; 3 ADAS Gleadthorpe, Meden Vale, Mansfield, Nottingham NG20 9PF, UK; 4 Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YQ, UK Summary 1. The aim of this study was to determine vegetation and soil microbial responses to fertilizers and lime applied in a 12 year study at species-rich upland (Cumbria, U.K.) and lowland (Monmouthshire, U.K.) mesotrophic hay meadows. 2. Treatments were 6, 12 or 24 tonnes farmyard manure (FYM) ha -1 applied annually or triennially, inorganic fertilizers giving equivalent amounts of N, P and K to 12 or 24 t FYM ha -1 applied annually or triennially, and lime applied either alone or with 12 t FYM ha -1 applied annually or triennially. 3. Annual FYM at 24 tonnes ha -1 reduced species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species at both meadows and increased the proportional cover of negative indicator species, while 12 t FYM ha -1 applied annually was detrimental at the lowland species-rich meadow but not at the upland meadow. Inorganic fertilizers were no more damaging to plant species-richness than equivalent FYM treatments. High vegetation quality was maintained by FYM at ≤12 t ha -1 year -1 in the upland meadow, where such levels had previously been used, with some improvement in botanical diversity at lower levels, but modeling suggested that only levels of about ≤ 4 tonnes FYM ha -1 year -1 were sustainable at the lowland meadow with no recent history of fertilizer use. Fertilizers of either type had no detectable impact on the soil microbial communities. 4. Between-meadow differences in response to the treatments are most likely attributable to differences in site-specific factors, including past management, rather than to innate differences in plant community type, although there was little evidence of vegetation adapting to initially-damaging fertility inputs. 5. Synthesis and applications. Knowledge of soil physical and chemical status and past fertility management is important in deciding what level of fertilizer use might be tolerable. Relatively modest inputs can reduce the ecological value of sensitive vegetation in meadows with no recent history of such inputs, whereas moderate inputs of fertilizer and lime are likely to be ecologically sustainable where there is a long history of such inputs. Inorganic fertilizers are no more damaging than FYM when applied at equivalent amounts of N, P and K. * Correspondence author. Email:[email protected]
Transcript
Page 1: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

1

Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the maintenance of species-rich hay meadows a 12 year fertilizer and lime experiment Francis W Kirkham1 Robert M Dunn2 Jerry RB Tallowin2 Anne Bhogal3 Brian J Chambers3 and Richard D Bardgett4 1Ecological Research amp Consultancy Far View Nymet Rowland Crediton Devon EX17 6AL UK 2Rothamsted Research North Wyke Okehampton Devon EX20 2SB 3ADAS Gleadthorpe Meden Vale Mansfield Nottingham NG20 9PF UK 4Lancaster Environment Centre Lancaster University Lancaster LA1 4YQ UK

Summary

1 The aim of this study was to determine vegetation and soil microbial responses to

fertilizers and lime applied in a 12 year study at species-rich upland (Cumbria UK) and

lowland (Monmouthshire UK) mesotrophic hay meadows

2 Treatments were 6 12 or 24 tonnes farmyard manure (FYM) ha-1

applied annually or

triennially inorganic fertilizers giving equivalent amounts of N P and K to 12 or 24 t

FYM ha-1

applied annually or triennially and lime applied either alone or with 12 t FYM

ha-1

applied annually or triennially

3 Annual FYM at 24 tonnes ha-1

reduced species-richness and the richness of positive

indicator species at both meadows and increased the proportional cover of negative

indicator species while 12 t FYM ha-1

applied annually was detrimental at the lowland

species-rich meadow but not at the upland meadow Inorganic fertilizers were no more

damaging to plant species-richness than equivalent FYM treatments High vegetation

quality was maintained by FYM at le12 t ha-1

year-1

in the upland meadow where such

levels had previously been used with some improvement in botanical diversity at lower

levels but modeling suggested that only levels of about le 4 tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

were

sustainable at the lowland meadow with no recent history of fertilizer use Fertilizers of

either type had no detectable impact on the soil microbial communities

4 Between-meadow differences in response to the treatments are most likely attributable

to differences in site-specific factors including past management rather than to innate

differences in plant community type although there was little evidence of vegetation

adapting to initially-damaging fertility inputs

5 Synthesis and applications Knowledge of soil physical and chemical status and past

fertility management is important in deciding what level of fertilizer use might be

tolerable Relatively modest inputs can reduce the ecological value of sensitive vegetation

in meadows with no recent history of such inputs whereas moderate inputs of fertilizer

and lime are likely to be ecologically sustainable where there is a long history of such

inputs Inorganic fertilizers are no more damaging than FYM when applied at equivalent

amounts of N P and K

Correspondence author Emailfranciskirkhamgmailcom

2

Key-words farmyard manure inorganic fertilizer vegetation composition hay

meadows species-rich grassland

Introduction

Widespread losses of species-rich grasslands occurred throughout Britain and mainland

Europe during the second half of the 20th

Century due to agricultural intensification

(Fuller 1987 Ellenberg 1988 Bakker 1989) with associated severe declines in many

once common plant and animal species (Ratcliffe 1977 1984 Fuller 1987 Rich amp

Woodruff 1996 Goulson et al 2005) These losses many of which have been

associated with increased use of artificial fertilizers (Ellenberg 1988 Bakker 1989

Berendse et al 1992 Myklestad amp Saeligtersdal 2004) have made it vitally important both

to develop methods for restoring diversity to species-impoverished grasslands (Ormerod

2003) and to define appropriate vegetation management to maintain those high nature

value grasslands that remain or that have been created

Cynosurus cristatus ndash Centaurea nigra grassland the MG5 community of the British

National Vegetation Classification (NVC ndash Rodwell 1992) is the most widespread

species-rich lowland meadow community in the UK (Blackstock et al 1999) whilst the

MG3 Anthoxanthum odoratum ndash Geranium sylvaticum grassland is the characteristic

hay meadow of the upland fringes of northern England (Rodwell 1992) MG5 grassland

has close affinity to Atlantic and Sub-Atlantic Cynosurion grassland in Europe whilst

MG3 grassland has clear affinities with meadows growing at higher altitudes throughout

northern and central mainland Europe (Rodwell et al 2007)

Communities such as these are the result of traditional management maintained over a

long period of time A combination of hay cutting and grazing is the most common form

of vegetation management in both MG3 and MG5 habitats although some MG5

communities are managed by extensive grazing only (Smith amp Jones 1991 Rodwell

1992 Smith amp Rushton 1994 Smith et al 1996 Crofts amp Jefferson 1999 Jefferson

2005) Use of farmyard manure (FYM) and occasional liming are also traditional

practices for hay meadows (Smith 1988 Simpson amp Jefferson 1996 Tallowin 1998

Crofts amp Jefferson 1999 Jefferson 2005) but what constitutes sustainable practices to

maintain the nature conservation value of some species-rich communities is ill defined

There is a large body of evidence showing the detrimental effects of inorganic fertilizers

on species-rich meadow vegetation (eg Berendse et al 1992 Mountford Lakhani amp

Kirkham 1993 Kirkham Mountford amp Wilkins 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) and on

components of the soil microbial community including decomposer and arbuscular

mycorrhizal fungi which are known to play key roles in nutrient cycling and plant

nutrition in species-rich grasslands (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison Griffith amp

Bardgett 2000a Donisson et al 2000b) However no previous study has examined the

impacts of FYM treatments on vegetation and soil microbial communities when matched

with inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent amounts of inorganic nitrogen (N)

phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) Changes in farming practice in the UK have reduced

the availability of FYM so there is a need to ascertain if or when inorganic fertilizers

can be suitable alternatives

These questions need to be resolved as a basis for refining management guidelines

applied within statutory sites and agri-environment schemes for the conservation of

3

biodiversity within existing species-rich semi-natural plant communities and within

meadows that have undergone restoration of biodiversity

An experiment involving several FYM or matched inorganic equivalent fertilizer

treatments and treatments incorporating initial liming with or without annual or

intermittent (triennial) FYM applications was established in 1999 on in species-rich

meadows at a lowland site in Monmouthshire UK and an upland site in Cumbria UK

Treatment effects on botanical composition were monitored annually to address the

following specific hypotheses for species-rich meadows

H1 ndash increasing rates of fertilizer reduce species richness and nature value

H2 ndash inorganic fertilizer and FYM treatments supplying equivalent amounts of N P and

K differ in their effects on the botanical composition

H3 ndash fertilizers (whether inorganic or FYM) applied triennially differ in their impact on

botanical composition compared with correspondingly lower amounts applied annually

H4 ndash applying lime to raise soil pH to 60 with or without annual or triennial FYM is

consistent with the maintenance or enhancement of vegetation quality

H5 ndash applying FYM or inorganic fertilizers over a period of 12 years will alter the

composition of soil microbial communities

Preliminary agronomic and botanical results have been reported elsewhere (Tallowin et

al 2002 Kirkham et al 2002 Kirkham et al 2008) This paper describes botanical and

soil microbial responses over the period 1999-2010 Nomenclature of vascular plants

follows Stace (2010) except for NVC community names which follow Rodwell (1992)

Materials and methods

EXPERIMENT SITES

Experimental plots were established in 1999 in two agriculturally unimproved meadows one at

an upland site at in Cumbria North West England (Raisbeck) and the other at a lowland site in

Monmouthshire South Wales (Pentwyn) The upland meadow is located at 54ordm 27rsquo N and 2ordm 34rsquo

W (National Grid Reference NY635069) near the village of Orton whilst the lowland meadow is

close to Monmouth at 51ordm 46rsquo N and 2ordm 41rsquo W (NGR SO524093)

Annual and seasonal rainfall

Average rainfall differed between the two areas 1999-2009 means (recorded at Meteorological

Office weather stations at Newton Rigg in Cumbria (NGR NY493308) and Ross-on-Wye (NGR

SO598238) in Monmouthshire) were 982 mm and 797 mm for annual rainfall for the upland and

lowland sites respectively and 525 mm and 462 mm respectively for the growing season (April-

October) These values were somewhat higher than the longer term (1980-2009) averages - by

3 and 6 for annual and seasonal rainfall respectively at the upland site and by 8 and 13

respectively at the lowland site

Plant communities

The vegetation of the upland meadow in 1999 (Kirkham et al 2002) corresponded to the MG3b

(Anthoxanthum odoratum-Geranium sylvaticum grassland Briza media sub-community) of the

NVC whilst that at the lowland meadow was close to both MG5a (Cynosurus cristatus-

Centaurea nigra grassland Lathyrus pratensis sub-community) and MG5c (Danthonia

decumbens sub-community) although lacking some of the preferential species differentiating

MG5c from the MG5a (Rodwell 1992)

4

Past management

Both meadows had previously been managed over a long period by cutting for hay with aftermath

grazing Cutting occurred after 1 July at the upland meadow and after the second week in July at

the lowland meadow The upland meadow had received about 12 t FYM ha-1

each year usually in

late April but occasionally in mid summer following the hay harvest and had received periodic

applications of lime (amounts not known) the last one in about 1993 Details of past fertilizer

application at the lowland meadow are uncertain although this site had not received any form of

fertilizer or lime in the preceding 20 years or more there is some evidence to suggest that basic

slag and lime may have been applied at some time before that

Soil properties

Soils at the upland meadow were clay-loam in texture whilst those at the lowland meadow were

a mixture of sandy silt loam to silty clay-loam The upland meadow soils were notably higher in

total N carbon and organic matter (Table 1)

Table 1 Soil chemical properties (top 75 cm) at experimental sites in Cumbria (the upland

meadow) and Wales (the lowland meadow) in 1999

Upland meadow Lowland meadow

Mean Range Mean Range

pH 518 512-527 501 494-511

Total N 065 059-071 034 029-039

C 676 615-776 315 266-351

Organic matter 1718 1577-2069 903 801-973

Olsen extractable P (mg l-1

) 550 444-679 512 410-600

Exchangeable K (mg l-1

) 1971 1629-2479 1747 1323-2205

Exchangeable Mg (mg l-1

) 1548 1368-1957 2014 1606-2389

Exchangeable Ca (mg l-1

) 1480 1334-1723 1047 852-1214

Measured by loss on ignition (LOI)

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

All experimental treatments (see Table 2) were applied by hand to individual 7m x 5m plots laid

out in a randomized block design with three replicate blocks at each site Treatments were applied

between March and late April Due to access restrictions resulting from the national outbreak of

Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) no treatment was applied in 2001 This meant that treatments

requiring annual applications only received a total of 1112 (92) of the intended amounts over

the 12 year period 1999-2010 Triennial treatments were applied in 1999 2002 2005 and 2008

5

Table 2 Treatments applied 1999-2010 at the upland and lowland meadows Values are the mean

amounts applied (kg ha-1

year-1

elemental N P and K) either as FYM (estimated) or in inorganic

form (actual) averaged over 12 yearsa 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed only in both

1999 and 2005 at the upland site but in 1999 only at the lowland site Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Upland meadow Lowland meadow

Treatment N P K N P K

1 Untreated control 00 00 00 00 00 00

2 Limed (in 2005) control 00 00 00 00 00 00

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 44 50 345 29 38 292

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 88 100 689 57 76 585

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 176 199 1378

114 151 1169

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 15 22 113 09 13 110

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 30 45 226

19 26 221

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 61 90 452

38 52 441

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 85 84 689 61 63 585

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 170 168 1378

121 125 1169

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 30 36 226

24 21 221

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 61 72 452

48 42 441

13 Lime in years 1 (and 7) 00 00 00 00 00 00

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 88 100 689 57 76 585

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 30 45 226 19 26 221 aNote that no fertilizer was applied in 2001 so that for annual treatments the amounts shown

are 1112ths of the mean amount applied in each of the remaining years

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime

in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

The FYM used in the experiment was sourced locally from the same farms each year and was

sampled at the time of application for subsequent chemical analysis The ADAS Manure Nitrogen

Evaluation Routine (MANNER Chambers et al 1999) was used between 1999 and 2006 to

predict the amount of plant available N supplied by the FYM after which a refined model

(MANNER-NPK Nicholson et al 2010) was used Refinements to the model included more

detailed N mineralisation functions and predictions of N availability in the year following

application Availabilities of 60 and 90 of total P and K respectively (Anon 2010) were

assumed between 1999 and 2006 and this assumption for K was maintained throughout the 1999-

2010 period From 2007 onwards the assumed availability of P from FYM was increased to 80

of total P in line with information on longer term release of plant-available P from FYM (Smith

et al 1998) For both N and P the mean amounts assumed to have been applied in FYM

treatments averaged over 1999-2010 and shown in Table 2 are based upon revised estimates for

the whole period The inorganic fertilizer N treatments applied each year ie the inorganic

lsquoequivalentsrsquo for specific FYM treatments (see Table 2) were based upon estimates made using

the original MANNER model from 1999-2006 and MANNER-NPK from 2007-2010 Similarly

6

the inorganic fertilizer P applied each year corresponded to 60 of the total P in FYM between

1999 and 2006 and 80 from 2007-2010

Inorganic N P and K were applied as ammonium nitrate triple super-phosphate and muriate of

potash respectively to the relevant treatments The FYM treatments were designed to encompass

the range of inputs traditionally applied to species-rich hay meadows upon which current agri-

environment guidelines are based (Simpson and Jefferson 1996 Crofts and Jefferson 1999)

Lime was applied to treatments 13 14 and 15 only at each site in March-April 1999 and to most

treatments in 2005 (Table 2) The latter included the three previously limed treatments at the

upland meadow but not at the lowland one since soil pH levels had not fallen significantly by

2005 on these plots at the latter site Based on assessments of soil texture and soil pH tests

conducted in February-March the amounts of lime were calculated to be sufficient to raise the

soil pH of the experimental plots to 60 (Anon 2010)

At each site one plot per replicate block received no fertilizer or lime (untreated control)

between 1999 and 2005 whilst another plot per replicate was designated as a continuation of past

fertilizer inputs At the lowland meadow the latter was identical to the untreated control

treatment but at the upland meadow it was identical to Treatment 4 (12 t ha-1

FYM annually) In

2005 a decision was made to treat occasional liming as lsquobackgroundrsquo management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites to be triggered for each treatment in future years once mean pH

for that treatment had declined to 55 whilst retaining both an untreated control (ie nil fertilizer

nil lime ndash Treatment 1) and a nil fertilizer (limed in 2005) control treatment (Treatment 2) at each

site The rationale behind this decision is addressed in the Discussion section At the lowland

meadow one of the two hitherto untreated control plots per replicate (Treatment 2) was therefore

limed in 2005 along with other treatments Only one nil input plot per replicate was available at

the upland meadow but since the site had a history of liming the existing nil input plots were

limed in 2005 (Treatment 2) and new untreated control plots (Treatment 1) were established

adjacent to each replicate block with the end at which each was located chosen randomly for

each block

The experimental plots were cut for hay after 1 July each year at the upland site and after 15

July at the lowland site the actual cutting date being dependent on weather conditions The hay

aftermath growth was grazed each year with experimental plots being grazed with the remainder

of the field At the upland meadow mature sheep were used normally commencing in September-

October continuing until March or late April The lowland meadow was grazed by beef store

cattle from mid Octoberearly November to late February

Botanical assessments were carried out during May each year except in 2001 at the upland

meadow due to FMD restrictions The percentage cover of each species present was estimated

visually in three 1m2 quadrats positioned at random within each plot in 1999 and then fixed for

the project duration

Soils were sampled in March 1999 2002 2004 2007 and 2010 by taking five 35 mm diameter x

75mm deep soil cores at random from within each treatment plot but outside the fixed positions

of the three 1m2 botanical survey quadrats The five samples per plot were combined dried at

30oC and then ground prior to analysis for organic carbon (C) total nitrogen (N) Olsen

extractable P exchangeable potassium (K) magnesium (Mg) calcium (Ca) sodium (Na) and pH

(in H2O) using standard laboratory methods (Allen 1974 MAFF 1986)

Soils were further sampled in June 1999 2002 2004 2007 and 2010 for soil microbial

assessment by taking five 35 mm diameter x 100 mm deep cores which were subsequently bulked

for each plot sieved (5 mm) and stored at 4oC prior to analysis Microbial community structure

was assessed using phospholipid fatty acid analysis (PLFA) as described by Bardgett et al

(1996) The fatty acids i150 a150 150 i160 170 i170 cy170 cis181ω7 and cy190 were

chosen to represent bacterial PLFAs (Federle 1986 Frostegaringrd Tunlid amp Baringaringth 1993) and

182ω6 was used as an indicator of fungal biomass (Federle 1986) The ratio of 182ω6bacterial

7

PLFAs was taken to represent the ratio of fungal-to-bacterial biomass in soil (Bardgett Hobbs amp

Frostegaringrd 1996 Frostegaringrd amp Baringaringth 1996)

DERIVED BOTANICAL VARIABLES

Estimates of cover for individual species were converted to a percentage of the total live

vegetation cover present in each quadrat in order to minimize the effects of year-to-year variation

and variation between treatments in vegetation density and total cover Several composite

variables were calculated to characterize the vegetation and these were then averaged across the

three quadrats in each plot to give plot mean values for each variable Plot means were then used

as the basic units for subsequent analyses of treatment effects

Key variables

Five key variables were used to investigate the effects of treatment and time on botanical

composition total species-richness (the total number of vascular plant species per m2) the

number per m2 of MG3 and MG5 positive indicator species (the upland and lowland meadows

respectively) the aggregate cover of these species as a percentage of total vegetation cover the

number per m2 of negative indicator species and the aggregate cover of negative indicator

species as a percentage of total vegetation cover Positive mesotrophic indicator species were

identified from lists produced by Robertson and Jefferson (2000) for use in monitoring the

condition of grassland Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) in MG3 (Anthoxanthum

odoratum-Geranium sylvaticum grassland) and MG5 (Cynosurus cristatus-Centaurea nigra

grassland) communities of the NVC (Rodwell 1992) A single list of negative indicator species

was compiled from the generic negative indicators for MG3 and MG5 communities (Robertson amp

Jefferson 2000) augmented by species shown in previous work (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996) to be favoured by nutrient addition and for which an increase in abundance

would indicate a negative effect on plant community quality Positive and negative indicator

species are listed in Supporting Information Table S3

Additional variables

Among other derived variables was the weighted Ellenberg N score (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham

et al 2008) referred to hereafter as the fertility score The Ellenberg N index represents the

degree of association with soil fertility (not specifically soil N) of a particular species (Ellenberg

1988 Hill et al 1999) Fertility scores were calculated for each quadrat as the average N index

of the component species weighted according to the proportional contribution of each species to

total vegetation cover Plot mean fertility scores were highly correlated at both sites with the

aggregate cover of negative indicator species (NI) (Pearson r=0845 and r=0927 at the upland

and lowland sites respectively in 2010 both Plt0001) The latter variable was preferred to

fertility scores for statistical analyses in this paper because it proved more responsive to fertilizer

treatments although fertility scores are referred to in the Discussion section in relation to results

from elsewhere

DATA ANALYSIS

ANOVAs for treatment effects

For each of the key variables botanical data for all years 1999-2010 except 2001 at the upland

meadow and for all treatments except Treatment 1 at the same meadow were analyzed by

repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA - Genstat V Committee 1997) with Year as the

repeated measures factor Separate ANOVAs were carried out for each variable within each site

using three separate ANOVA models in each case In each model variation between replicate

8

blocks was accounted for by treating replicate as a blocking factor The first model included all

the treatments except Treatment 1 at the upland meadow whilst the other two models used

balanced factorial subsets (series) of treatments (see Table 2) the Form x Rate x Frequency

(FRF) series and the Lime x FYM frequency (LFF) series

The FRF series tested the effects of form of fertilizer (ie FYM or inorganic) the rate at which

fertilizers were applied (12 or 24 t FYM ha-1

and inorganic treatments corresponding to these)

the frequency at which treatments were applied (ie annual or triennially) and all two- and three-

way interactions between these factors

The LFF series tested the effects of liming regime ie lime in 1999 (and 2005 at the upland site)

versus lime in 2005 only the frequency of FYM application (ie nil annual or triennially) and the

Lime x FYM frequency interaction All FYM treatments within this series were applied at 12 t ha-

1 At both sites the LFF series consisted of Treatments 2 4 7 13 14 and 15 (see Table 2) The

liming comparison therefore differed slightly between the two sites since liming was repeated in

2005 on plots previously limed in 1999 at the upland meadow but not repeated at the lowland

one

In both the LFF and the FRF models for each variable the first stratum of the ANOVA

consisted of the effects of all factors and interactions averaged over time with the same factors

and interactions repeated in the second stratum with time as an additional factor

In all repeated measures ANOVAs to account for the repeated measures aspect all degrees of

freedom in the Year x Treatment stratum were adjusted to account for departure from

homogeneity of the population covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the

Greenhouse-Geisser method (Genstat V Committee 1997)

In most years including 2010 all species were recorded individually but at both sites

bryophytes were recorded only as a single group in some years This had only a small influence

on the data since there were seldom more than two bryophyte species present in a quadrat and

more often less Nevertheless for consistency between years bryophytes were treated as a single

group in all years when calculating total species-richness for data for repeated measures

ANOVAs

In addition to the above analyses 2010 data for the key variables were tested alone for treatment

effects by ANOVA and by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) the latter using 1999 data as the

covariate (Genstat 5 Committee 1997) All three models as described above were tested The

ANCOVAs for the upland meadow excluded Treatment 1 (untreated control plots established in

2005) Where an ANCOVA showed significant treatment covariance with 1999 data the adjusted

results were used In other cases the unadjusted analyses were used Individual bryophyte species

were included in the calculations of species-richness at both sites in these analyses

In all analyses in order to satisfy the conditions for ANOVA (normality of residuals and

homogeneity of residual variation) all percentage data were transformed before analysis by

arcsine(radicp) where p is the percentage value expressed as a proportion All results quoted for

percentage data refer to analyses of arcsine-square root transformed data

Mixed modeling

Mixed model analysis (Residual Estimated Maximum Likelihood ndash REML Genstat V

Committee 1997) was used to identify any effect of form rate or frequency of application on

vegetation composition at each site in 2010 not simply attributable to the total (or mean per year)

amount of fertilizer applied over the study period A variable representing this amount was

included as a continuous explanatory variable in each analysis along with other fixed factors

form rate and frequency of application (Block was included as a random factor) Since the total

(or mean) amounts of N P and K applied over the whole period were completely correlated

across treatments at each site it was not feasible to include all three elements as separate terms in

the model Nor was it feasible to simply use a single notional variable for fertilizer amount (eg t

9

FYM ha-1

year-1

or inorganic equivalent) since there was lack of equivalence of N and P supply

(but not K) between individual FYM treatments and their corresponding inorganic treatments For

each dependent variable tested two separate models were therefore developed using either N or

P ha-1

year-1

as the continuous variable In each case the presence of any non-linearity in response

was tested by including a quadratic term (ie N2 or P

2) or where more appropriate by logn-

transformation of the explanatory variable

For each analysis an initial model was constructed that included all five main effects and all

interactions The importance of each term was evaluated initially by a χ2 test on the Wald statistic

(Genstat V Committee 1997) The number and order of terms in the model were varied but with

N or P amount always included until a model was developed in which each term was significant

The model was then refined by testing the contribution of each term to the model by the more

conservative deviance test ie a χ2 test on the difference in deviance between the model

containing the term and a sub-model from which it was dropped (Welham amp Thompson 1997)

Where there was an interaction between form of fertilizer and the quadratic term but no overall

effect of form - implying that the difference between the two forms of fertilizer lay primarily in a

difference in the curvilinearity of response - a refined model was tested with the P2 (or N

2) x

Form term replaced by Form nested within the quadratic term (eg P2Form) This has the effect

of absorbing the overall effect of form of fertilizer within the interaction term and returns the two

terms P2 and P

2 x Form (Galwey 2006)

These modeling approaches were used with total species-richness and PI species-richness as

(separate) response variables and included data for all treatments limed in 2005 but not in 1999

(ie Trs 2-12)

Results

TEMPORAL CHANGES 1999-2010

Changes over time in total species-richness (number per m2) richness and proportional

aggregate cover of positive indicator (PI) species and proportional aggregate cover of

negative indicator (NI) species at the upland and lowland meadows are represented in

Figs 1 and 2 respectively for ten of the fifteen treatments applied Repeated measures

ANOVA statistics for each of the four variables are given in Supporting Information

Tables S4 S6 S8 and S10 respectively for the upland meadow and Tables S12 S14 S16

and S18 respectively for the lowland meadow Corresponding mean values for each

treatment in each year are given in Tables S5 S7 S9 S11 S13 S15 S17 and S19

respectively Changes in individual species abundance contributing to the temporal trends

in aggregated PI and NI species described below are outlined under Supporting

Information

The upland meadow

The overall effects of both treatment and time were highly significant in the repeated

measures ANOVA for total species-richness at the upland meadow (both P=0001) but

there was no treatment x time interaction (P=0647)

After an initial decline between 1999 and 2000 species-richness remained fairly

constant for most treatments until 2003 after which there was a general increase with the

notable exception of the highest rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) (Fig 1a) The latter

treatment declined further between 2005 and 2007 after which it appeared to recover

slightly and averaged over all years this treatment was significantly less species-rich than

all others (Plt001 compared to Tr 14 Plt0001 the remainder) None of the remaining

10

treatments differed significantly from the limed control treatment (Tr2) averaged over all

years However the more species-rich treatments ie nil fertilizer plus lime applied in

both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) low rate annual and medium rate triennial FYM (Tr 3 and 7

respectively) and the inorganic equivalent to the latter (Tr 11) were all more species-rich

averaged over all years (Plt005) than annual FYM at the medium rate under either

liming regime (ie Trs 4 and 14 the former representing a continuation of past

management)

The effect of the high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was largely responsible for

several main effects within the repeated measures ANOVA of treatments within the Form

x Rate x Frequency (FRF) factorial series namely overall effects (averaged over all

years) of rate (mediumgthigh P=0002) and frequency (triennialgtannual P=0001) of

application and a not quite significant effect of form of fertilizer (FYMltinorganic

P=0057) Both the form x rate and the form x frequency interactions were significant

(both Plt005) high rate FYM was significantly less species-rich than all other

combinations averaged over annual and three yearly treatments and all years (Plt0001

compared to medium rate FYM Plt001 compared to both medium and high rate

inorganic fertilizer) and annual FYM was less species-rich than three yearly FYM and

than inorganic fertilizer either annually or triennial (all Plt0001) averaged over the two

application rates and all years The rate x frequency interaction was not significant

(P=0105) but there was a marginally non-significant three-way interaction between

form rate and frequency (P=0070) with a low mean for high rate annual FYM (Tr 5

211 species m-2

) contrasting markedly with all other treatments within the series

particularly with low rate triennial FYM (Tr 6 267 species m-2

)

As with the full treatment ANOVA the overall time factor was highly significant

(Plt0001) but only the effect of application frequency varied significantly with time

(interaction Plt005) Species-richness declined slightly with annual treatments overall

and increased slightly with triennial treatments such that differences between these were

significant in all years from 2005 onwards (Plt001 for 2006-2009 Plt005 in 2005 and

2010)

Both the richness and aggregate cover of PI species (PI) increased generally with time

(Fig 1b and 1c) although in both cases there was a progressive separation between

species The temporal trend was particularly marked for PI although the time factor

was highly significant (Plt0001) in both ANOVAs The overall treatment effect was

marginally non-significant for PI richness (P=0069) with no indication of a time x

treatment interaction (P=0703) whereas for PI there was both a significant treatment

effect (P=0002) and a marginally non-significant treatment x time interaction (P=0075)

Mean PI was significantly lower averaged over all years for annual FYM treatments at

both 12 and 24 t ha-1

(ie Trs 4 14 and 5) compared to several other treatments notably

nil fertilizer treatments limed either in 2005 only (Tr 2 limed control) or in both 1999

and 2005 (Tr 13) (all differences Plt0001 except Tr 2 vs Tr 4 Plt001) and triennial

inorganic treatments (Trs 11 and 12 Plt001 except for Tr 4 vs Tr 11 Plt005) Within

the FRF series ANOVA the increase in PI over time was greater with triennial

treatments compared to annual averaged over fertilizer forms and rates of application

(time x frequency interaction P=0016) with a marked overall difference due to

application frequency averaged over forms rates and all years (P=0005)

11

PI species-richness showed a similar overall effect of application frequency within the

FRF series (triennialgtannual P=0013) and also a significant overall effect of rate of

application (medium rategthigh rate P=0022) The overall effect of form of fertilizer was

marginally non-significant (FYMltinorganic P=0059) and there was no significant

interaction among any of the three factors averaged over all years nor any interaction

with time

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Specie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime in Year 1+ ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime in Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr1)

a Species richness (total)

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

Fig 1 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition an upland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control

The mean number of negative indicator (NI) species per m2 averaged over all treatments

varied significantly over time at the upland meadow (P=0002 data not shown) though

with no consistent trend - it was lowest overall in 2002 (499 per m2) and highest in both

1999 and 2008 (548 per m2) The treatment x time interaction was not significant

(P=0469) but the overall treatment effect was highly significant (Plt0001) mean

number of NI species per m2 was higher than the limed control (Tr 1 453 per m

2) with

all fertilizer treatments except Treatments 11 (triennial inorganic fertilizer at the lower

rate) and 13 (nil fertilizer limed in both 1999 and 2005) (Plt0001 for all except Trs 5

and 6 for which Plt001) The highest mean NI m-2

value was for high rate inorganic

12

fertilizer (Tr 10 565 per m2) which differed significantly (Plt005) from its FYM

counterpart Treatment 5 There was however no consistent difference between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts and no overall effect of form of fertilizer

within the FRF series (P=0745) There was a significant form x rate interaction within

this ANOVA (P=0032) but only the difference between the high rate and lower rate

inorganic means was significant (high rategtlower rate Plt001)

The aggregate contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator species (NI)

showed a very marked divergence between treatments over time (Fig 1d) with NI

either changing little or declining under most treatments again with the notable exception

of high rate annual FYM (Tr 5) under which NI increased over time Time treatment

and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001) The

predominant temporal trend was downward (from 25 of live cover in 1999 to 14 in

2010 averaged over all treatments) but NI for Treatment 5 had significantly increased

compared to 1999 in 2002 2003 (Plt005) 2005 (Plt0001) 2008 (Plt0001) and 2009

(Plt001) but not in 2010 (Fig 1d) The most marked declines in NI occurred on the

limed control (Tr 2) nil fertilizer plus lime in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) and the lower

rate triennial inorganic fertilizer treatments (Tr 11) differences compared to both 1999

and 2002 were highly significant (Plt0001) in most subsequent years for these

treatments A smaller decline also occurred after 2002 on the treatment equivalent to past

inputs (ie12 t ha-1

year-1

annual FYM Tr 4) In most years this treatment differed little

from the equivalent FYM treatment limed in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 14)

These trends were reflected in highly significant overall effects on NI within the FRF

series of form (FYMgtinorganic) rate (mediumlthigh) and frequency (triennialltannual)

(all effects Plt0001) Time x rate and time x frequency interactions were both significant

(P=0019 and Plt0001 respectively) with a marginally non-significant rate x frequency

interaction averaged over all years (P=0054) NI declined over time under both

application rates averaged over forms and frequencies of application but the decline was

slower with high rate treatments compared to lower rate Difference between rates were

significant in all years from 2002 onwards (Plt005 in 2002 2006 and 2007 Plt0001 in

other years) Overall differences due to frequency of application were even more marked

Under annual application NI declined initially from 2003-2006 compared to 1999 but

subsequently recovered and did not differ from 1999 levels from 2007 onwards whilst

under triennial application differences were highly significant (Plt0001) compared to

1999 from 2003 onwards with significant differences between years during this same

period (Plt005 in 2003 and 2006 Plt0001 in remaining years)

Repeated-measures ANOVAs within the LFF treatment series at the upland meadow

showed no overall effect of liming regime on temporal trends for any of the above

variables nor any interaction of lime with either time or FYM frequency - note that FYM

was applied at the intermediate rate (12 t ha-1

) in all FYM treatments within this series

The overall effect of FYM frequency was significant for both PI (P=0003) and the

number of NI species m-2

(P=0001) PI was highest with nil FYM and lowest with

annual FYM with triennial intermediate and differing significantly (Plt005) from the

other two means NI species m-2

did not differ between triennial and annual application

within the LFF series but both were significantly higher than nil FYM (Plt001 for

triennial Plt0001 for annual application) There was also a significant time x FYM

frequency interaction for NI within this series (P=0001) reflecting a more rapid

13

decline with nil FYM than with triennial FYM and no significant overall trend with

annual FYM when averaged over both lime treatments

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Spe

cie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime Year 1 + ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr 1)

a Species richness (total)

2

3

4

5

6

7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

Fig 2 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition at a lowland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control treatment and those that had received lime in year 1

Treatments 1 and 2 were identical (nil input) until 2005

The lowland meadow

Both time and treatment were significant within the ANOVA for total species-richness at

the lowland meadow (Plt0001 and P=0009 respectively and in contrast to the upland

site the treatment x time interaction was significant (P=0012) Averaged over all years

high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was significantly less species-rich than all others

except Treatment 14 (annual FYM at 12 t ha-1

limed in 1999) having declined

progressively between 1999 and 2009 (Fig 2a) with most differences significant at

Plt001 Treatment 14 did not differ significantly overall compared to the corresponding

FYM treatment not limed until 2005 (Tr 4) although these two treatments showed

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 2: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

2

Key-words farmyard manure inorganic fertilizer vegetation composition hay

meadows species-rich grassland

Introduction

Widespread losses of species-rich grasslands occurred throughout Britain and mainland

Europe during the second half of the 20th

Century due to agricultural intensification

(Fuller 1987 Ellenberg 1988 Bakker 1989) with associated severe declines in many

once common plant and animal species (Ratcliffe 1977 1984 Fuller 1987 Rich amp

Woodruff 1996 Goulson et al 2005) These losses many of which have been

associated with increased use of artificial fertilizers (Ellenberg 1988 Bakker 1989

Berendse et al 1992 Myklestad amp Saeligtersdal 2004) have made it vitally important both

to develop methods for restoring diversity to species-impoverished grasslands (Ormerod

2003) and to define appropriate vegetation management to maintain those high nature

value grasslands that remain or that have been created

Cynosurus cristatus ndash Centaurea nigra grassland the MG5 community of the British

National Vegetation Classification (NVC ndash Rodwell 1992) is the most widespread

species-rich lowland meadow community in the UK (Blackstock et al 1999) whilst the

MG3 Anthoxanthum odoratum ndash Geranium sylvaticum grassland is the characteristic

hay meadow of the upland fringes of northern England (Rodwell 1992) MG5 grassland

has close affinity to Atlantic and Sub-Atlantic Cynosurion grassland in Europe whilst

MG3 grassland has clear affinities with meadows growing at higher altitudes throughout

northern and central mainland Europe (Rodwell et al 2007)

Communities such as these are the result of traditional management maintained over a

long period of time A combination of hay cutting and grazing is the most common form

of vegetation management in both MG3 and MG5 habitats although some MG5

communities are managed by extensive grazing only (Smith amp Jones 1991 Rodwell

1992 Smith amp Rushton 1994 Smith et al 1996 Crofts amp Jefferson 1999 Jefferson

2005) Use of farmyard manure (FYM) and occasional liming are also traditional

practices for hay meadows (Smith 1988 Simpson amp Jefferson 1996 Tallowin 1998

Crofts amp Jefferson 1999 Jefferson 2005) but what constitutes sustainable practices to

maintain the nature conservation value of some species-rich communities is ill defined

There is a large body of evidence showing the detrimental effects of inorganic fertilizers

on species-rich meadow vegetation (eg Berendse et al 1992 Mountford Lakhani amp

Kirkham 1993 Kirkham Mountford amp Wilkins 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) and on

components of the soil microbial community including decomposer and arbuscular

mycorrhizal fungi which are known to play key roles in nutrient cycling and plant

nutrition in species-rich grasslands (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison Griffith amp

Bardgett 2000a Donisson et al 2000b) However no previous study has examined the

impacts of FYM treatments on vegetation and soil microbial communities when matched

with inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent amounts of inorganic nitrogen (N)

phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) Changes in farming practice in the UK have reduced

the availability of FYM so there is a need to ascertain if or when inorganic fertilizers

can be suitable alternatives

These questions need to be resolved as a basis for refining management guidelines

applied within statutory sites and agri-environment schemes for the conservation of

3

biodiversity within existing species-rich semi-natural plant communities and within

meadows that have undergone restoration of biodiversity

An experiment involving several FYM or matched inorganic equivalent fertilizer

treatments and treatments incorporating initial liming with or without annual or

intermittent (triennial) FYM applications was established in 1999 on in species-rich

meadows at a lowland site in Monmouthshire UK and an upland site in Cumbria UK

Treatment effects on botanical composition were monitored annually to address the

following specific hypotheses for species-rich meadows

H1 ndash increasing rates of fertilizer reduce species richness and nature value

H2 ndash inorganic fertilizer and FYM treatments supplying equivalent amounts of N P and

K differ in their effects on the botanical composition

H3 ndash fertilizers (whether inorganic or FYM) applied triennially differ in their impact on

botanical composition compared with correspondingly lower amounts applied annually

H4 ndash applying lime to raise soil pH to 60 with or without annual or triennial FYM is

consistent with the maintenance or enhancement of vegetation quality

H5 ndash applying FYM or inorganic fertilizers over a period of 12 years will alter the

composition of soil microbial communities

Preliminary agronomic and botanical results have been reported elsewhere (Tallowin et

al 2002 Kirkham et al 2002 Kirkham et al 2008) This paper describes botanical and

soil microbial responses over the period 1999-2010 Nomenclature of vascular plants

follows Stace (2010) except for NVC community names which follow Rodwell (1992)

Materials and methods

EXPERIMENT SITES

Experimental plots were established in 1999 in two agriculturally unimproved meadows one at

an upland site at in Cumbria North West England (Raisbeck) and the other at a lowland site in

Monmouthshire South Wales (Pentwyn) The upland meadow is located at 54ordm 27rsquo N and 2ordm 34rsquo

W (National Grid Reference NY635069) near the village of Orton whilst the lowland meadow is

close to Monmouth at 51ordm 46rsquo N and 2ordm 41rsquo W (NGR SO524093)

Annual and seasonal rainfall

Average rainfall differed between the two areas 1999-2009 means (recorded at Meteorological

Office weather stations at Newton Rigg in Cumbria (NGR NY493308) and Ross-on-Wye (NGR

SO598238) in Monmouthshire) were 982 mm and 797 mm for annual rainfall for the upland and

lowland sites respectively and 525 mm and 462 mm respectively for the growing season (April-

October) These values were somewhat higher than the longer term (1980-2009) averages - by

3 and 6 for annual and seasonal rainfall respectively at the upland site and by 8 and 13

respectively at the lowland site

Plant communities

The vegetation of the upland meadow in 1999 (Kirkham et al 2002) corresponded to the MG3b

(Anthoxanthum odoratum-Geranium sylvaticum grassland Briza media sub-community) of the

NVC whilst that at the lowland meadow was close to both MG5a (Cynosurus cristatus-

Centaurea nigra grassland Lathyrus pratensis sub-community) and MG5c (Danthonia

decumbens sub-community) although lacking some of the preferential species differentiating

MG5c from the MG5a (Rodwell 1992)

4

Past management

Both meadows had previously been managed over a long period by cutting for hay with aftermath

grazing Cutting occurred after 1 July at the upland meadow and after the second week in July at

the lowland meadow The upland meadow had received about 12 t FYM ha-1

each year usually in

late April but occasionally in mid summer following the hay harvest and had received periodic

applications of lime (amounts not known) the last one in about 1993 Details of past fertilizer

application at the lowland meadow are uncertain although this site had not received any form of

fertilizer or lime in the preceding 20 years or more there is some evidence to suggest that basic

slag and lime may have been applied at some time before that

Soil properties

Soils at the upland meadow were clay-loam in texture whilst those at the lowland meadow were

a mixture of sandy silt loam to silty clay-loam The upland meadow soils were notably higher in

total N carbon and organic matter (Table 1)

Table 1 Soil chemical properties (top 75 cm) at experimental sites in Cumbria (the upland

meadow) and Wales (the lowland meadow) in 1999

Upland meadow Lowland meadow

Mean Range Mean Range

pH 518 512-527 501 494-511

Total N 065 059-071 034 029-039

C 676 615-776 315 266-351

Organic matter 1718 1577-2069 903 801-973

Olsen extractable P (mg l-1

) 550 444-679 512 410-600

Exchangeable K (mg l-1

) 1971 1629-2479 1747 1323-2205

Exchangeable Mg (mg l-1

) 1548 1368-1957 2014 1606-2389

Exchangeable Ca (mg l-1

) 1480 1334-1723 1047 852-1214

Measured by loss on ignition (LOI)

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

All experimental treatments (see Table 2) were applied by hand to individual 7m x 5m plots laid

out in a randomized block design with three replicate blocks at each site Treatments were applied

between March and late April Due to access restrictions resulting from the national outbreak of

Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) no treatment was applied in 2001 This meant that treatments

requiring annual applications only received a total of 1112 (92) of the intended amounts over

the 12 year period 1999-2010 Triennial treatments were applied in 1999 2002 2005 and 2008

5

Table 2 Treatments applied 1999-2010 at the upland and lowland meadows Values are the mean

amounts applied (kg ha-1

year-1

elemental N P and K) either as FYM (estimated) or in inorganic

form (actual) averaged over 12 yearsa 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed only in both

1999 and 2005 at the upland site but in 1999 only at the lowland site Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Upland meadow Lowland meadow

Treatment N P K N P K

1 Untreated control 00 00 00 00 00 00

2 Limed (in 2005) control 00 00 00 00 00 00

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 44 50 345 29 38 292

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 88 100 689 57 76 585

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 176 199 1378

114 151 1169

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 15 22 113 09 13 110

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 30 45 226

19 26 221

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 61 90 452

38 52 441

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 85 84 689 61 63 585

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 170 168 1378

121 125 1169

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 30 36 226

24 21 221

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 61 72 452

48 42 441

13 Lime in years 1 (and 7) 00 00 00 00 00 00

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 88 100 689 57 76 585

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 30 45 226 19 26 221 aNote that no fertilizer was applied in 2001 so that for annual treatments the amounts shown

are 1112ths of the mean amount applied in each of the remaining years

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime

in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

The FYM used in the experiment was sourced locally from the same farms each year and was

sampled at the time of application for subsequent chemical analysis The ADAS Manure Nitrogen

Evaluation Routine (MANNER Chambers et al 1999) was used between 1999 and 2006 to

predict the amount of plant available N supplied by the FYM after which a refined model

(MANNER-NPK Nicholson et al 2010) was used Refinements to the model included more

detailed N mineralisation functions and predictions of N availability in the year following

application Availabilities of 60 and 90 of total P and K respectively (Anon 2010) were

assumed between 1999 and 2006 and this assumption for K was maintained throughout the 1999-

2010 period From 2007 onwards the assumed availability of P from FYM was increased to 80

of total P in line with information on longer term release of plant-available P from FYM (Smith

et al 1998) For both N and P the mean amounts assumed to have been applied in FYM

treatments averaged over 1999-2010 and shown in Table 2 are based upon revised estimates for

the whole period The inorganic fertilizer N treatments applied each year ie the inorganic

lsquoequivalentsrsquo for specific FYM treatments (see Table 2) were based upon estimates made using

the original MANNER model from 1999-2006 and MANNER-NPK from 2007-2010 Similarly

6

the inorganic fertilizer P applied each year corresponded to 60 of the total P in FYM between

1999 and 2006 and 80 from 2007-2010

Inorganic N P and K were applied as ammonium nitrate triple super-phosphate and muriate of

potash respectively to the relevant treatments The FYM treatments were designed to encompass

the range of inputs traditionally applied to species-rich hay meadows upon which current agri-

environment guidelines are based (Simpson and Jefferson 1996 Crofts and Jefferson 1999)

Lime was applied to treatments 13 14 and 15 only at each site in March-April 1999 and to most

treatments in 2005 (Table 2) The latter included the three previously limed treatments at the

upland meadow but not at the lowland one since soil pH levels had not fallen significantly by

2005 on these plots at the latter site Based on assessments of soil texture and soil pH tests

conducted in February-March the amounts of lime were calculated to be sufficient to raise the

soil pH of the experimental plots to 60 (Anon 2010)

At each site one plot per replicate block received no fertilizer or lime (untreated control)

between 1999 and 2005 whilst another plot per replicate was designated as a continuation of past

fertilizer inputs At the lowland meadow the latter was identical to the untreated control

treatment but at the upland meadow it was identical to Treatment 4 (12 t ha-1

FYM annually) In

2005 a decision was made to treat occasional liming as lsquobackgroundrsquo management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites to be triggered for each treatment in future years once mean pH

for that treatment had declined to 55 whilst retaining both an untreated control (ie nil fertilizer

nil lime ndash Treatment 1) and a nil fertilizer (limed in 2005) control treatment (Treatment 2) at each

site The rationale behind this decision is addressed in the Discussion section At the lowland

meadow one of the two hitherto untreated control plots per replicate (Treatment 2) was therefore

limed in 2005 along with other treatments Only one nil input plot per replicate was available at

the upland meadow but since the site had a history of liming the existing nil input plots were

limed in 2005 (Treatment 2) and new untreated control plots (Treatment 1) were established

adjacent to each replicate block with the end at which each was located chosen randomly for

each block

The experimental plots were cut for hay after 1 July each year at the upland site and after 15

July at the lowland site the actual cutting date being dependent on weather conditions The hay

aftermath growth was grazed each year with experimental plots being grazed with the remainder

of the field At the upland meadow mature sheep were used normally commencing in September-

October continuing until March or late April The lowland meadow was grazed by beef store

cattle from mid Octoberearly November to late February

Botanical assessments were carried out during May each year except in 2001 at the upland

meadow due to FMD restrictions The percentage cover of each species present was estimated

visually in three 1m2 quadrats positioned at random within each plot in 1999 and then fixed for

the project duration

Soils were sampled in March 1999 2002 2004 2007 and 2010 by taking five 35 mm diameter x

75mm deep soil cores at random from within each treatment plot but outside the fixed positions

of the three 1m2 botanical survey quadrats The five samples per plot were combined dried at

30oC and then ground prior to analysis for organic carbon (C) total nitrogen (N) Olsen

extractable P exchangeable potassium (K) magnesium (Mg) calcium (Ca) sodium (Na) and pH

(in H2O) using standard laboratory methods (Allen 1974 MAFF 1986)

Soils were further sampled in June 1999 2002 2004 2007 and 2010 for soil microbial

assessment by taking five 35 mm diameter x 100 mm deep cores which were subsequently bulked

for each plot sieved (5 mm) and stored at 4oC prior to analysis Microbial community structure

was assessed using phospholipid fatty acid analysis (PLFA) as described by Bardgett et al

(1996) The fatty acids i150 a150 150 i160 170 i170 cy170 cis181ω7 and cy190 were

chosen to represent bacterial PLFAs (Federle 1986 Frostegaringrd Tunlid amp Baringaringth 1993) and

182ω6 was used as an indicator of fungal biomass (Federle 1986) The ratio of 182ω6bacterial

7

PLFAs was taken to represent the ratio of fungal-to-bacterial biomass in soil (Bardgett Hobbs amp

Frostegaringrd 1996 Frostegaringrd amp Baringaringth 1996)

DERIVED BOTANICAL VARIABLES

Estimates of cover for individual species were converted to a percentage of the total live

vegetation cover present in each quadrat in order to minimize the effects of year-to-year variation

and variation between treatments in vegetation density and total cover Several composite

variables were calculated to characterize the vegetation and these were then averaged across the

three quadrats in each plot to give plot mean values for each variable Plot means were then used

as the basic units for subsequent analyses of treatment effects

Key variables

Five key variables were used to investigate the effects of treatment and time on botanical

composition total species-richness (the total number of vascular plant species per m2) the

number per m2 of MG3 and MG5 positive indicator species (the upland and lowland meadows

respectively) the aggregate cover of these species as a percentage of total vegetation cover the

number per m2 of negative indicator species and the aggregate cover of negative indicator

species as a percentage of total vegetation cover Positive mesotrophic indicator species were

identified from lists produced by Robertson and Jefferson (2000) for use in monitoring the

condition of grassland Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) in MG3 (Anthoxanthum

odoratum-Geranium sylvaticum grassland) and MG5 (Cynosurus cristatus-Centaurea nigra

grassland) communities of the NVC (Rodwell 1992) A single list of negative indicator species

was compiled from the generic negative indicators for MG3 and MG5 communities (Robertson amp

Jefferson 2000) augmented by species shown in previous work (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996) to be favoured by nutrient addition and for which an increase in abundance

would indicate a negative effect on plant community quality Positive and negative indicator

species are listed in Supporting Information Table S3

Additional variables

Among other derived variables was the weighted Ellenberg N score (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham

et al 2008) referred to hereafter as the fertility score The Ellenberg N index represents the

degree of association with soil fertility (not specifically soil N) of a particular species (Ellenberg

1988 Hill et al 1999) Fertility scores were calculated for each quadrat as the average N index

of the component species weighted according to the proportional contribution of each species to

total vegetation cover Plot mean fertility scores were highly correlated at both sites with the

aggregate cover of negative indicator species (NI) (Pearson r=0845 and r=0927 at the upland

and lowland sites respectively in 2010 both Plt0001) The latter variable was preferred to

fertility scores for statistical analyses in this paper because it proved more responsive to fertilizer

treatments although fertility scores are referred to in the Discussion section in relation to results

from elsewhere

DATA ANALYSIS

ANOVAs for treatment effects

For each of the key variables botanical data for all years 1999-2010 except 2001 at the upland

meadow and for all treatments except Treatment 1 at the same meadow were analyzed by

repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA - Genstat V Committee 1997) with Year as the

repeated measures factor Separate ANOVAs were carried out for each variable within each site

using three separate ANOVA models in each case In each model variation between replicate

8

blocks was accounted for by treating replicate as a blocking factor The first model included all

the treatments except Treatment 1 at the upland meadow whilst the other two models used

balanced factorial subsets (series) of treatments (see Table 2) the Form x Rate x Frequency

(FRF) series and the Lime x FYM frequency (LFF) series

The FRF series tested the effects of form of fertilizer (ie FYM or inorganic) the rate at which

fertilizers were applied (12 or 24 t FYM ha-1

and inorganic treatments corresponding to these)

the frequency at which treatments were applied (ie annual or triennially) and all two- and three-

way interactions between these factors

The LFF series tested the effects of liming regime ie lime in 1999 (and 2005 at the upland site)

versus lime in 2005 only the frequency of FYM application (ie nil annual or triennially) and the

Lime x FYM frequency interaction All FYM treatments within this series were applied at 12 t ha-

1 At both sites the LFF series consisted of Treatments 2 4 7 13 14 and 15 (see Table 2) The

liming comparison therefore differed slightly between the two sites since liming was repeated in

2005 on plots previously limed in 1999 at the upland meadow but not repeated at the lowland

one

In both the LFF and the FRF models for each variable the first stratum of the ANOVA

consisted of the effects of all factors and interactions averaged over time with the same factors

and interactions repeated in the second stratum with time as an additional factor

In all repeated measures ANOVAs to account for the repeated measures aspect all degrees of

freedom in the Year x Treatment stratum were adjusted to account for departure from

homogeneity of the population covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the

Greenhouse-Geisser method (Genstat V Committee 1997)

In most years including 2010 all species were recorded individually but at both sites

bryophytes were recorded only as a single group in some years This had only a small influence

on the data since there were seldom more than two bryophyte species present in a quadrat and

more often less Nevertheless for consistency between years bryophytes were treated as a single

group in all years when calculating total species-richness for data for repeated measures

ANOVAs

In addition to the above analyses 2010 data for the key variables were tested alone for treatment

effects by ANOVA and by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) the latter using 1999 data as the

covariate (Genstat 5 Committee 1997) All three models as described above were tested The

ANCOVAs for the upland meadow excluded Treatment 1 (untreated control plots established in

2005) Where an ANCOVA showed significant treatment covariance with 1999 data the adjusted

results were used In other cases the unadjusted analyses were used Individual bryophyte species

were included in the calculations of species-richness at both sites in these analyses

In all analyses in order to satisfy the conditions for ANOVA (normality of residuals and

homogeneity of residual variation) all percentage data were transformed before analysis by

arcsine(radicp) where p is the percentage value expressed as a proportion All results quoted for

percentage data refer to analyses of arcsine-square root transformed data

Mixed modeling

Mixed model analysis (Residual Estimated Maximum Likelihood ndash REML Genstat V

Committee 1997) was used to identify any effect of form rate or frequency of application on

vegetation composition at each site in 2010 not simply attributable to the total (or mean per year)

amount of fertilizer applied over the study period A variable representing this amount was

included as a continuous explanatory variable in each analysis along with other fixed factors

form rate and frequency of application (Block was included as a random factor) Since the total

(or mean) amounts of N P and K applied over the whole period were completely correlated

across treatments at each site it was not feasible to include all three elements as separate terms in

the model Nor was it feasible to simply use a single notional variable for fertilizer amount (eg t

9

FYM ha-1

year-1

or inorganic equivalent) since there was lack of equivalence of N and P supply

(but not K) between individual FYM treatments and their corresponding inorganic treatments For

each dependent variable tested two separate models were therefore developed using either N or

P ha-1

year-1

as the continuous variable In each case the presence of any non-linearity in response

was tested by including a quadratic term (ie N2 or P

2) or where more appropriate by logn-

transformation of the explanatory variable

For each analysis an initial model was constructed that included all five main effects and all

interactions The importance of each term was evaluated initially by a χ2 test on the Wald statistic

(Genstat V Committee 1997) The number and order of terms in the model were varied but with

N or P amount always included until a model was developed in which each term was significant

The model was then refined by testing the contribution of each term to the model by the more

conservative deviance test ie a χ2 test on the difference in deviance between the model

containing the term and a sub-model from which it was dropped (Welham amp Thompson 1997)

Where there was an interaction between form of fertilizer and the quadratic term but no overall

effect of form - implying that the difference between the two forms of fertilizer lay primarily in a

difference in the curvilinearity of response - a refined model was tested with the P2 (or N

2) x

Form term replaced by Form nested within the quadratic term (eg P2Form) This has the effect

of absorbing the overall effect of form of fertilizer within the interaction term and returns the two

terms P2 and P

2 x Form (Galwey 2006)

These modeling approaches were used with total species-richness and PI species-richness as

(separate) response variables and included data for all treatments limed in 2005 but not in 1999

(ie Trs 2-12)

Results

TEMPORAL CHANGES 1999-2010

Changes over time in total species-richness (number per m2) richness and proportional

aggregate cover of positive indicator (PI) species and proportional aggregate cover of

negative indicator (NI) species at the upland and lowland meadows are represented in

Figs 1 and 2 respectively for ten of the fifteen treatments applied Repeated measures

ANOVA statistics for each of the four variables are given in Supporting Information

Tables S4 S6 S8 and S10 respectively for the upland meadow and Tables S12 S14 S16

and S18 respectively for the lowland meadow Corresponding mean values for each

treatment in each year are given in Tables S5 S7 S9 S11 S13 S15 S17 and S19

respectively Changes in individual species abundance contributing to the temporal trends

in aggregated PI and NI species described below are outlined under Supporting

Information

The upland meadow

The overall effects of both treatment and time were highly significant in the repeated

measures ANOVA for total species-richness at the upland meadow (both P=0001) but

there was no treatment x time interaction (P=0647)

After an initial decline between 1999 and 2000 species-richness remained fairly

constant for most treatments until 2003 after which there was a general increase with the

notable exception of the highest rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) (Fig 1a) The latter

treatment declined further between 2005 and 2007 after which it appeared to recover

slightly and averaged over all years this treatment was significantly less species-rich than

all others (Plt001 compared to Tr 14 Plt0001 the remainder) None of the remaining

10

treatments differed significantly from the limed control treatment (Tr2) averaged over all

years However the more species-rich treatments ie nil fertilizer plus lime applied in

both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) low rate annual and medium rate triennial FYM (Tr 3 and 7

respectively) and the inorganic equivalent to the latter (Tr 11) were all more species-rich

averaged over all years (Plt005) than annual FYM at the medium rate under either

liming regime (ie Trs 4 and 14 the former representing a continuation of past

management)

The effect of the high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was largely responsible for

several main effects within the repeated measures ANOVA of treatments within the Form

x Rate x Frequency (FRF) factorial series namely overall effects (averaged over all

years) of rate (mediumgthigh P=0002) and frequency (triennialgtannual P=0001) of

application and a not quite significant effect of form of fertilizer (FYMltinorganic

P=0057) Both the form x rate and the form x frequency interactions were significant

(both Plt005) high rate FYM was significantly less species-rich than all other

combinations averaged over annual and three yearly treatments and all years (Plt0001

compared to medium rate FYM Plt001 compared to both medium and high rate

inorganic fertilizer) and annual FYM was less species-rich than three yearly FYM and

than inorganic fertilizer either annually or triennial (all Plt0001) averaged over the two

application rates and all years The rate x frequency interaction was not significant

(P=0105) but there was a marginally non-significant three-way interaction between

form rate and frequency (P=0070) with a low mean for high rate annual FYM (Tr 5

211 species m-2

) contrasting markedly with all other treatments within the series

particularly with low rate triennial FYM (Tr 6 267 species m-2

)

As with the full treatment ANOVA the overall time factor was highly significant

(Plt0001) but only the effect of application frequency varied significantly with time

(interaction Plt005) Species-richness declined slightly with annual treatments overall

and increased slightly with triennial treatments such that differences between these were

significant in all years from 2005 onwards (Plt001 for 2006-2009 Plt005 in 2005 and

2010)

Both the richness and aggregate cover of PI species (PI) increased generally with time

(Fig 1b and 1c) although in both cases there was a progressive separation between

species The temporal trend was particularly marked for PI although the time factor

was highly significant (Plt0001) in both ANOVAs The overall treatment effect was

marginally non-significant for PI richness (P=0069) with no indication of a time x

treatment interaction (P=0703) whereas for PI there was both a significant treatment

effect (P=0002) and a marginally non-significant treatment x time interaction (P=0075)

Mean PI was significantly lower averaged over all years for annual FYM treatments at

both 12 and 24 t ha-1

(ie Trs 4 14 and 5) compared to several other treatments notably

nil fertilizer treatments limed either in 2005 only (Tr 2 limed control) or in both 1999

and 2005 (Tr 13) (all differences Plt0001 except Tr 2 vs Tr 4 Plt001) and triennial

inorganic treatments (Trs 11 and 12 Plt001 except for Tr 4 vs Tr 11 Plt005) Within

the FRF series ANOVA the increase in PI over time was greater with triennial

treatments compared to annual averaged over fertilizer forms and rates of application

(time x frequency interaction P=0016) with a marked overall difference due to

application frequency averaged over forms rates and all years (P=0005)

11

PI species-richness showed a similar overall effect of application frequency within the

FRF series (triennialgtannual P=0013) and also a significant overall effect of rate of

application (medium rategthigh rate P=0022) The overall effect of form of fertilizer was

marginally non-significant (FYMltinorganic P=0059) and there was no significant

interaction among any of the three factors averaged over all years nor any interaction

with time

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Specie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime in Year 1+ ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime in Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr1)

a Species richness (total)

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

Fig 1 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition an upland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control

The mean number of negative indicator (NI) species per m2 averaged over all treatments

varied significantly over time at the upland meadow (P=0002 data not shown) though

with no consistent trend - it was lowest overall in 2002 (499 per m2) and highest in both

1999 and 2008 (548 per m2) The treatment x time interaction was not significant

(P=0469) but the overall treatment effect was highly significant (Plt0001) mean

number of NI species per m2 was higher than the limed control (Tr 1 453 per m

2) with

all fertilizer treatments except Treatments 11 (triennial inorganic fertilizer at the lower

rate) and 13 (nil fertilizer limed in both 1999 and 2005) (Plt0001 for all except Trs 5

and 6 for which Plt001) The highest mean NI m-2

value was for high rate inorganic

12

fertilizer (Tr 10 565 per m2) which differed significantly (Plt005) from its FYM

counterpart Treatment 5 There was however no consistent difference between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts and no overall effect of form of fertilizer

within the FRF series (P=0745) There was a significant form x rate interaction within

this ANOVA (P=0032) but only the difference between the high rate and lower rate

inorganic means was significant (high rategtlower rate Plt001)

The aggregate contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator species (NI)

showed a very marked divergence between treatments over time (Fig 1d) with NI

either changing little or declining under most treatments again with the notable exception

of high rate annual FYM (Tr 5) under which NI increased over time Time treatment

and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001) The

predominant temporal trend was downward (from 25 of live cover in 1999 to 14 in

2010 averaged over all treatments) but NI for Treatment 5 had significantly increased

compared to 1999 in 2002 2003 (Plt005) 2005 (Plt0001) 2008 (Plt0001) and 2009

(Plt001) but not in 2010 (Fig 1d) The most marked declines in NI occurred on the

limed control (Tr 2) nil fertilizer plus lime in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) and the lower

rate triennial inorganic fertilizer treatments (Tr 11) differences compared to both 1999

and 2002 were highly significant (Plt0001) in most subsequent years for these

treatments A smaller decline also occurred after 2002 on the treatment equivalent to past

inputs (ie12 t ha-1

year-1

annual FYM Tr 4) In most years this treatment differed little

from the equivalent FYM treatment limed in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 14)

These trends were reflected in highly significant overall effects on NI within the FRF

series of form (FYMgtinorganic) rate (mediumlthigh) and frequency (triennialltannual)

(all effects Plt0001) Time x rate and time x frequency interactions were both significant

(P=0019 and Plt0001 respectively) with a marginally non-significant rate x frequency

interaction averaged over all years (P=0054) NI declined over time under both

application rates averaged over forms and frequencies of application but the decline was

slower with high rate treatments compared to lower rate Difference between rates were

significant in all years from 2002 onwards (Plt005 in 2002 2006 and 2007 Plt0001 in

other years) Overall differences due to frequency of application were even more marked

Under annual application NI declined initially from 2003-2006 compared to 1999 but

subsequently recovered and did not differ from 1999 levels from 2007 onwards whilst

under triennial application differences were highly significant (Plt0001) compared to

1999 from 2003 onwards with significant differences between years during this same

period (Plt005 in 2003 and 2006 Plt0001 in remaining years)

Repeated-measures ANOVAs within the LFF treatment series at the upland meadow

showed no overall effect of liming regime on temporal trends for any of the above

variables nor any interaction of lime with either time or FYM frequency - note that FYM

was applied at the intermediate rate (12 t ha-1

) in all FYM treatments within this series

The overall effect of FYM frequency was significant for both PI (P=0003) and the

number of NI species m-2

(P=0001) PI was highest with nil FYM and lowest with

annual FYM with triennial intermediate and differing significantly (Plt005) from the

other two means NI species m-2

did not differ between triennial and annual application

within the LFF series but both were significantly higher than nil FYM (Plt001 for

triennial Plt0001 for annual application) There was also a significant time x FYM

frequency interaction for NI within this series (P=0001) reflecting a more rapid

13

decline with nil FYM than with triennial FYM and no significant overall trend with

annual FYM when averaged over both lime treatments

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Spe

cie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime Year 1 + ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr 1)

a Species richness (total)

2

3

4

5

6

7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

Fig 2 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition at a lowland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control treatment and those that had received lime in year 1

Treatments 1 and 2 were identical (nil input) until 2005

The lowland meadow

Both time and treatment were significant within the ANOVA for total species-richness at

the lowland meadow (Plt0001 and P=0009 respectively and in contrast to the upland

site the treatment x time interaction was significant (P=0012) Averaged over all years

high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was significantly less species-rich than all others

except Treatment 14 (annual FYM at 12 t ha-1

limed in 1999) having declined

progressively between 1999 and 2009 (Fig 2a) with most differences significant at

Plt001 Treatment 14 did not differ significantly overall compared to the corresponding

FYM treatment not limed until 2005 (Tr 4) although these two treatments showed

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 3: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

3

biodiversity within existing species-rich semi-natural plant communities and within

meadows that have undergone restoration of biodiversity

An experiment involving several FYM or matched inorganic equivalent fertilizer

treatments and treatments incorporating initial liming with or without annual or

intermittent (triennial) FYM applications was established in 1999 on in species-rich

meadows at a lowland site in Monmouthshire UK and an upland site in Cumbria UK

Treatment effects on botanical composition were monitored annually to address the

following specific hypotheses for species-rich meadows

H1 ndash increasing rates of fertilizer reduce species richness and nature value

H2 ndash inorganic fertilizer and FYM treatments supplying equivalent amounts of N P and

K differ in their effects on the botanical composition

H3 ndash fertilizers (whether inorganic or FYM) applied triennially differ in their impact on

botanical composition compared with correspondingly lower amounts applied annually

H4 ndash applying lime to raise soil pH to 60 with or without annual or triennial FYM is

consistent with the maintenance or enhancement of vegetation quality

H5 ndash applying FYM or inorganic fertilizers over a period of 12 years will alter the

composition of soil microbial communities

Preliminary agronomic and botanical results have been reported elsewhere (Tallowin et

al 2002 Kirkham et al 2002 Kirkham et al 2008) This paper describes botanical and

soil microbial responses over the period 1999-2010 Nomenclature of vascular plants

follows Stace (2010) except for NVC community names which follow Rodwell (1992)

Materials and methods

EXPERIMENT SITES

Experimental plots were established in 1999 in two agriculturally unimproved meadows one at

an upland site at in Cumbria North West England (Raisbeck) and the other at a lowland site in

Monmouthshire South Wales (Pentwyn) The upland meadow is located at 54ordm 27rsquo N and 2ordm 34rsquo

W (National Grid Reference NY635069) near the village of Orton whilst the lowland meadow is

close to Monmouth at 51ordm 46rsquo N and 2ordm 41rsquo W (NGR SO524093)

Annual and seasonal rainfall

Average rainfall differed between the two areas 1999-2009 means (recorded at Meteorological

Office weather stations at Newton Rigg in Cumbria (NGR NY493308) and Ross-on-Wye (NGR

SO598238) in Monmouthshire) were 982 mm and 797 mm for annual rainfall for the upland and

lowland sites respectively and 525 mm and 462 mm respectively for the growing season (April-

October) These values were somewhat higher than the longer term (1980-2009) averages - by

3 and 6 for annual and seasonal rainfall respectively at the upland site and by 8 and 13

respectively at the lowland site

Plant communities

The vegetation of the upland meadow in 1999 (Kirkham et al 2002) corresponded to the MG3b

(Anthoxanthum odoratum-Geranium sylvaticum grassland Briza media sub-community) of the

NVC whilst that at the lowland meadow was close to both MG5a (Cynosurus cristatus-

Centaurea nigra grassland Lathyrus pratensis sub-community) and MG5c (Danthonia

decumbens sub-community) although lacking some of the preferential species differentiating

MG5c from the MG5a (Rodwell 1992)

4

Past management

Both meadows had previously been managed over a long period by cutting for hay with aftermath

grazing Cutting occurred after 1 July at the upland meadow and after the second week in July at

the lowland meadow The upland meadow had received about 12 t FYM ha-1

each year usually in

late April but occasionally in mid summer following the hay harvest and had received periodic

applications of lime (amounts not known) the last one in about 1993 Details of past fertilizer

application at the lowland meadow are uncertain although this site had not received any form of

fertilizer or lime in the preceding 20 years or more there is some evidence to suggest that basic

slag and lime may have been applied at some time before that

Soil properties

Soils at the upland meadow were clay-loam in texture whilst those at the lowland meadow were

a mixture of sandy silt loam to silty clay-loam The upland meadow soils were notably higher in

total N carbon and organic matter (Table 1)

Table 1 Soil chemical properties (top 75 cm) at experimental sites in Cumbria (the upland

meadow) and Wales (the lowland meadow) in 1999

Upland meadow Lowland meadow

Mean Range Mean Range

pH 518 512-527 501 494-511

Total N 065 059-071 034 029-039

C 676 615-776 315 266-351

Organic matter 1718 1577-2069 903 801-973

Olsen extractable P (mg l-1

) 550 444-679 512 410-600

Exchangeable K (mg l-1

) 1971 1629-2479 1747 1323-2205

Exchangeable Mg (mg l-1

) 1548 1368-1957 2014 1606-2389

Exchangeable Ca (mg l-1

) 1480 1334-1723 1047 852-1214

Measured by loss on ignition (LOI)

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

All experimental treatments (see Table 2) were applied by hand to individual 7m x 5m plots laid

out in a randomized block design with three replicate blocks at each site Treatments were applied

between March and late April Due to access restrictions resulting from the national outbreak of

Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) no treatment was applied in 2001 This meant that treatments

requiring annual applications only received a total of 1112 (92) of the intended amounts over

the 12 year period 1999-2010 Triennial treatments were applied in 1999 2002 2005 and 2008

5

Table 2 Treatments applied 1999-2010 at the upland and lowland meadows Values are the mean

amounts applied (kg ha-1

year-1

elemental N P and K) either as FYM (estimated) or in inorganic

form (actual) averaged over 12 yearsa 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed only in both

1999 and 2005 at the upland site but in 1999 only at the lowland site Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Upland meadow Lowland meadow

Treatment N P K N P K

1 Untreated control 00 00 00 00 00 00

2 Limed (in 2005) control 00 00 00 00 00 00

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 44 50 345 29 38 292

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 88 100 689 57 76 585

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 176 199 1378

114 151 1169

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 15 22 113 09 13 110

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 30 45 226

19 26 221

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 61 90 452

38 52 441

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 85 84 689 61 63 585

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 170 168 1378

121 125 1169

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 30 36 226

24 21 221

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 61 72 452

48 42 441

13 Lime in years 1 (and 7) 00 00 00 00 00 00

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 88 100 689 57 76 585

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 30 45 226 19 26 221 aNote that no fertilizer was applied in 2001 so that for annual treatments the amounts shown

are 1112ths of the mean amount applied in each of the remaining years

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime

in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

The FYM used in the experiment was sourced locally from the same farms each year and was

sampled at the time of application for subsequent chemical analysis The ADAS Manure Nitrogen

Evaluation Routine (MANNER Chambers et al 1999) was used between 1999 and 2006 to

predict the amount of plant available N supplied by the FYM after which a refined model

(MANNER-NPK Nicholson et al 2010) was used Refinements to the model included more

detailed N mineralisation functions and predictions of N availability in the year following

application Availabilities of 60 and 90 of total P and K respectively (Anon 2010) were

assumed between 1999 and 2006 and this assumption for K was maintained throughout the 1999-

2010 period From 2007 onwards the assumed availability of P from FYM was increased to 80

of total P in line with information on longer term release of plant-available P from FYM (Smith

et al 1998) For both N and P the mean amounts assumed to have been applied in FYM

treatments averaged over 1999-2010 and shown in Table 2 are based upon revised estimates for

the whole period The inorganic fertilizer N treatments applied each year ie the inorganic

lsquoequivalentsrsquo for specific FYM treatments (see Table 2) were based upon estimates made using

the original MANNER model from 1999-2006 and MANNER-NPK from 2007-2010 Similarly

6

the inorganic fertilizer P applied each year corresponded to 60 of the total P in FYM between

1999 and 2006 and 80 from 2007-2010

Inorganic N P and K were applied as ammonium nitrate triple super-phosphate and muriate of

potash respectively to the relevant treatments The FYM treatments were designed to encompass

the range of inputs traditionally applied to species-rich hay meadows upon which current agri-

environment guidelines are based (Simpson and Jefferson 1996 Crofts and Jefferson 1999)

Lime was applied to treatments 13 14 and 15 only at each site in March-April 1999 and to most

treatments in 2005 (Table 2) The latter included the three previously limed treatments at the

upland meadow but not at the lowland one since soil pH levels had not fallen significantly by

2005 on these plots at the latter site Based on assessments of soil texture and soil pH tests

conducted in February-March the amounts of lime were calculated to be sufficient to raise the

soil pH of the experimental plots to 60 (Anon 2010)

At each site one plot per replicate block received no fertilizer or lime (untreated control)

between 1999 and 2005 whilst another plot per replicate was designated as a continuation of past

fertilizer inputs At the lowland meadow the latter was identical to the untreated control

treatment but at the upland meadow it was identical to Treatment 4 (12 t ha-1

FYM annually) In

2005 a decision was made to treat occasional liming as lsquobackgroundrsquo management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites to be triggered for each treatment in future years once mean pH

for that treatment had declined to 55 whilst retaining both an untreated control (ie nil fertilizer

nil lime ndash Treatment 1) and a nil fertilizer (limed in 2005) control treatment (Treatment 2) at each

site The rationale behind this decision is addressed in the Discussion section At the lowland

meadow one of the two hitherto untreated control plots per replicate (Treatment 2) was therefore

limed in 2005 along with other treatments Only one nil input plot per replicate was available at

the upland meadow but since the site had a history of liming the existing nil input plots were

limed in 2005 (Treatment 2) and new untreated control plots (Treatment 1) were established

adjacent to each replicate block with the end at which each was located chosen randomly for

each block

The experimental plots were cut for hay after 1 July each year at the upland site and after 15

July at the lowland site the actual cutting date being dependent on weather conditions The hay

aftermath growth was grazed each year with experimental plots being grazed with the remainder

of the field At the upland meadow mature sheep were used normally commencing in September-

October continuing until March or late April The lowland meadow was grazed by beef store

cattle from mid Octoberearly November to late February

Botanical assessments were carried out during May each year except in 2001 at the upland

meadow due to FMD restrictions The percentage cover of each species present was estimated

visually in three 1m2 quadrats positioned at random within each plot in 1999 and then fixed for

the project duration

Soils were sampled in March 1999 2002 2004 2007 and 2010 by taking five 35 mm diameter x

75mm deep soil cores at random from within each treatment plot but outside the fixed positions

of the three 1m2 botanical survey quadrats The five samples per plot were combined dried at

30oC and then ground prior to analysis for organic carbon (C) total nitrogen (N) Olsen

extractable P exchangeable potassium (K) magnesium (Mg) calcium (Ca) sodium (Na) and pH

(in H2O) using standard laboratory methods (Allen 1974 MAFF 1986)

Soils were further sampled in June 1999 2002 2004 2007 and 2010 for soil microbial

assessment by taking five 35 mm diameter x 100 mm deep cores which were subsequently bulked

for each plot sieved (5 mm) and stored at 4oC prior to analysis Microbial community structure

was assessed using phospholipid fatty acid analysis (PLFA) as described by Bardgett et al

(1996) The fatty acids i150 a150 150 i160 170 i170 cy170 cis181ω7 and cy190 were

chosen to represent bacterial PLFAs (Federle 1986 Frostegaringrd Tunlid amp Baringaringth 1993) and

182ω6 was used as an indicator of fungal biomass (Federle 1986) The ratio of 182ω6bacterial

7

PLFAs was taken to represent the ratio of fungal-to-bacterial biomass in soil (Bardgett Hobbs amp

Frostegaringrd 1996 Frostegaringrd amp Baringaringth 1996)

DERIVED BOTANICAL VARIABLES

Estimates of cover for individual species were converted to a percentage of the total live

vegetation cover present in each quadrat in order to minimize the effects of year-to-year variation

and variation between treatments in vegetation density and total cover Several composite

variables were calculated to characterize the vegetation and these were then averaged across the

three quadrats in each plot to give plot mean values for each variable Plot means were then used

as the basic units for subsequent analyses of treatment effects

Key variables

Five key variables were used to investigate the effects of treatment and time on botanical

composition total species-richness (the total number of vascular plant species per m2) the

number per m2 of MG3 and MG5 positive indicator species (the upland and lowland meadows

respectively) the aggregate cover of these species as a percentage of total vegetation cover the

number per m2 of negative indicator species and the aggregate cover of negative indicator

species as a percentage of total vegetation cover Positive mesotrophic indicator species were

identified from lists produced by Robertson and Jefferson (2000) for use in monitoring the

condition of grassland Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) in MG3 (Anthoxanthum

odoratum-Geranium sylvaticum grassland) and MG5 (Cynosurus cristatus-Centaurea nigra

grassland) communities of the NVC (Rodwell 1992) A single list of negative indicator species

was compiled from the generic negative indicators for MG3 and MG5 communities (Robertson amp

Jefferson 2000) augmented by species shown in previous work (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996) to be favoured by nutrient addition and for which an increase in abundance

would indicate a negative effect on plant community quality Positive and negative indicator

species are listed in Supporting Information Table S3

Additional variables

Among other derived variables was the weighted Ellenberg N score (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham

et al 2008) referred to hereafter as the fertility score The Ellenberg N index represents the

degree of association with soil fertility (not specifically soil N) of a particular species (Ellenberg

1988 Hill et al 1999) Fertility scores were calculated for each quadrat as the average N index

of the component species weighted according to the proportional contribution of each species to

total vegetation cover Plot mean fertility scores were highly correlated at both sites with the

aggregate cover of negative indicator species (NI) (Pearson r=0845 and r=0927 at the upland

and lowland sites respectively in 2010 both Plt0001) The latter variable was preferred to

fertility scores for statistical analyses in this paper because it proved more responsive to fertilizer

treatments although fertility scores are referred to in the Discussion section in relation to results

from elsewhere

DATA ANALYSIS

ANOVAs for treatment effects

For each of the key variables botanical data for all years 1999-2010 except 2001 at the upland

meadow and for all treatments except Treatment 1 at the same meadow were analyzed by

repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA - Genstat V Committee 1997) with Year as the

repeated measures factor Separate ANOVAs were carried out for each variable within each site

using three separate ANOVA models in each case In each model variation between replicate

8

blocks was accounted for by treating replicate as a blocking factor The first model included all

the treatments except Treatment 1 at the upland meadow whilst the other two models used

balanced factorial subsets (series) of treatments (see Table 2) the Form x Rate x Frequency

(FRF) series and the Lime x FYM frequency (LFF) series

The FRF series tested the effects of form of fertilizer (ie FYM or inorganic) the rate at which

fertilizers were applied (12 or 24 t FYM ha-1

and inorganic treatments corresponding to these)

the frequency at which treatments were applied (ie annual or triennially) and all two- and three-

way interactions between these factors

The LFF series tested the effects of liming regime ie lime in 1999 (and 2005 at the upland site)

versus lime in 2005 only the frequency of FYM application (ie nil annual or triennially) and the

Lime x FYM frequency interaction All FYM treatments within this series were applied at 12 t ha-

1 At both sites the LFF series consisted of Treatments 2 4 7 13 14 and 15 (see Table 2) The

liming comparison therefore differed slightly between the two sites since liming was repeated in

2005 on plots previously limed in 1999 at the upland meadow but not repeated at the lowland

one

In both the LFF and the FRF models for each variable the first stratum of the ANOVA

consisted of the effects of all factors and interactions averaged over time with the same factors

and interactions repeated in the second stratum with time as an additional factor

In all repeated measures ANOVAs to account for the repeated measures aspect all degrees of

freedom in the Year x Treatment stratum were adjusted to account for departure from

homogeneity of the population covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the

Greenhouse-Geisser method (Genstat V Committee 1997)

In most years including 2010 all species were recorded individually but at both sites

bryophytes were recorded only as a single group in some years This had only a small influence

on the data since there were seldom more than two bryophyte species present in a quadrat and

more often less Nevertheless for consistency between years bryophytes were treated as a single

group in all years when calculating total species-richness for data for repeated measures

ANOVAs

In addition to the above analyses 2010 data for the key variables were tested alone for treatment

effects by ANOVA and by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) the latter using 1999 data as the

covariate (Genstat 5 Committee 1997) All three models as described above were tested The

ANCOVAs for the upland meadow excluded Treatment 1 (untreated control plots established in

2005) Where an ANCOVA showed significant treatment covariance with 1999 data the adjusted

results were used In other cases the unadjusted analyses were used Individual bryophyte species

were included in the calculations of species-richness at both sites in these analyses

In all analyses in order to satisfy the conditions for ANOVA (normality of residuals and

homogeneity of residual variation) all percentage data were transformed before analysis by

arcsine(radicp) where p is the percentage value expressed as a proportion All results quoted for

percentage data refer to analyses of arcsine-square root transformed data

Mixed modeling

Mixed model analysis (Residual Estimated Maximum Likelihood ndash REML Genstat V

Committee 1997) was used to identify any effect of form rate or frequency of application on

vegetation composition at each site in 2010 not simply attributable to the total (or mean per year)

amount of fertilizer applied over the study period A variable representing this amount was

included as a continuous explanatory variable in each analysis along with other fixed factors

form rate and frequency of application (Block was included as a random factor) Since the total

(or mean) amounts of N P and K applied over the whole period were completely correlated

across treatments at each site it was not feasible to include all three elements as separate terms in

the model Nor was it feasible to simply use a single notional variable for fertilizer amount (eg t

9

FYM ha-1

year-1

or inorganic equivalent) since there was lack of equivalence of N and P supply

(but not K) between individual FYM treatments and their corresponding inorganic treatments For

each dependent variable tested two separate models were therefore developed using either N or

P ha-1

year-1

as the continuous variable In each case the presence of any non-linearity in response

was tested by including a quadratic term (ie N2 or P

2) or where more appropriate by logn-

transformation of the explanatory variable

For each analysis an initial model was constructed that included all five main effects and all

interactions The importance of each term was evaluated initially by a χ2 test on the Wald statistic

(Genstat V Committee 1997) The number and order of terms in the model were varied but with

N or P amount always included until a model was developed in which each term was significant

The model was then refined by testing the contribution of each term to the model by the more

conservative deviance test ie a χ2 test on the difference in deviance between the model

containing the term and a sub-model from which it was dropped (Welham amp Thompson 1997)

Where there was an interaction between form of fertilizer and the quadratic term but no overall

effect of form - implying that the difference between the two forms of fertilizer lay primarily in a

difference in the curvilinearity of response - a refined model was tested with the P2 (or N

2) x

Form term replaced by Form nested within the quadratic term (eg P2Form) This has the effect

of absorbing the overall effect of form of fertilizer within the interaction term and returns the two

terms P2 and P

2 x Form (Galwey 2006)

These modeling approaches were used with total species-richness and PI species-richness as

(separate) response variables and included data for all treatments limed in 2005 but not in 1999

(ie Trs 2-12)

Results

TEMPORAL CHANGES 1999-2010

Changes over time in total species-richness (number per m2) richness and proportional

aggregate cover of positive indicator (PI) species and proportional aggregate cover of

negative indicator (NI) species at the upland and lowland meadows are represented in

Figs 1 and 2 respectively for ten of the fifteen treatments applied Repeated measures

ANOVA statistics for each of the four variables are given in Supporting Information

Tables S4 S6 S8 and S10 respectively for the upland meadow and Tables S12 S14 S16

and S18 respectively for the lowland meadow Corresponding mean values for each

treatment in each year are given in Tables S5 S7 S9 S11 S13 S15 S17 and S19

respectively Changes in individual species abundance contributing to the temporal trends

in aggregated PI and NI species described below are outlined under Supporting

Information

The upland meadow

The overall effects of both treatment and time were highly significant in the repeated

measures ANOVA for total species-richness at the upland meadow (both P=0001) but

there was no treatment x time interaction (P=0647)

After an initial decline between 1999 and 2000 species-richness remained fairly

constant for most treatments until 2003 after which there was a general increase with the

notable exception of the highest rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) (Fig 1a) The latter

treatment declined further between 2005 and 2007 after which it appeared to recover

slightly and averaged over all years this treatment was significantly less species-rich than

all others (Plt001 compared to Tr 14 Plt0001 the remainder) None of the remaining

10

treatments differed significantly from the limed control treatment (Tr2) averaged over all

years However the more species-rich treatments ie nil fertilizer plus lime applied in

both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) low rate annual and medium rate triennial FYM (Tr 3 and 7

respectively) and the inorganic equivalent to the latter (Tr 11) were all more species-rich

averaged over all years (Plt005) than annual FYM at the medium rate under either

liming regime (ie Trs 4 and 14 the former representing a continuation of past

management)

The effect of the high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was largely responsible for

several main effects within the repeated measures ANOVA of treatments within the Form

x Rate x Frequency (FRF) factorial series namely overall effects (averaged over all

years) of rate (mediumgthigh P=0002) and frequency (triennialgtannual P=0001) of

application and a not quite significant effect of form of fertilizer (FYMltinorganic

P=0057) Both the form x rate and the form x frequency interactions were significant

(both Plt005) high rate FYM was significantly less species-rich than all other

combinations averaged over annual and three yearly treatments and all years (Plt0001

compared to medium rate FYM Plt001 compared to both medium and high rate

inorganic fertilizer) and annual FYM was less species-rich than three yearly FYM and

than inorganic fertilizer either annually or triennial (all Plt0001) averaged over the two

application rates and all years The rate x frequency interaction was not significant

(P=0105) but there was a marginally non-significant three-way interaction between

form rate and frequency (P=0070) with a low mean for high rate annual FYM (Tr 5

211 species m-2

) contrasting markedly with all other treatments within the series

particularly with low rate triennial FYM (Tr 6 267 species m-2

)

As with the full treatment ANOVA the overall time factor was highly significant

(Plt0001) but only the effect of application frequency varied significantly with time

(interaction Plt005) Species-richness declined slightly with annual treatments overall

and increased slightly with triennial treatments such that differences between these were

significant in all years from 2005 onwards (Plt001 for 2006-2009 Plt005 in 2005 and

2010)

Both the richness and aggregate cover of PI species (PI) increased generally with time

(Fig 1b and 1c) although in both cases there was a progressive separation between

species The temporal trend was particularly marked for PI although the time factor

was highly significant (Plt0001) in both ANOVAs The overall treatment effect was

marginally non-significant for PI richness (P=0069) with no indication of a time x

treatment interaction (P=0703) whereas for PI there was both a significant treatment

effect (P=0002) and a marginally non-significant treatment x time interaction (P=0075)

Mean PI was significantly lower averaged over all years for annual FYM treatments at

both 12 and 24 t ha-1

(ie Trs 4 14 and 5) compared to several other treatments notably

nil fertilizer treatments limed either in 2005 only (Tr 2 limed control) or in both 1999

and 2005 (Tr 13) (all differences Plt0001 except Tr 2 vs Tr 4 Plt001) and triennial

inorganic treatments (Trs 11 and 12 Plt001 except for Tr 4 vs Tr 11 Plt005) Within

the FRF series ANOVA the increase in PI over time was greater with triennial

treatments compared to annual averaged over fertilizer forms and rates of application

(time x frequency interaction P=0016) with a marked overall difference due to

application frequency averaged over forms rates and all years (P=0005)

11

PI species-richness showed a similar overall effect of application frequency within the

FRF series (triennialgtannual P=0013) and also a significant overall effect of rate of

application (medium rategthigh rate P=0022) The overall effect of form of fertilizer was

marginally non-significant (FYMltinorganic P=0059) and there was no significant

interaction among any of the three factors averaged over all years nor any interaction

with time

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Specie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime in Year 1+ ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime in Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr1)

a Species richness (total)

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

Fig 1 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition an upland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control

The mean number of negative indicator (NI) species per m2 averaged over all treatments

varied significantly over time at the upland meadow (P=0002 data not shown) though

with no consistent trend - it was lowest overall in 2002 (499 per m2) and highest in both

1999 and 2008 (548 per m2) The treatment x time interaction was not significant

(P=0469) but the overall treatment effect was highly significant (Plt0001) mean

number of NI species per m2 was higher than the limed control (Tr 1 453 per m

2) with

all fertilizer treatments except Treatments 11 (triennial inorganic fertilizer at the lower

rate) and 13 (nil fertilizer limed in both 1999 and 2005) (Plt0001 for all except Trs 5

and 6 for which Plt001) The highest mean NI m-2

value was for high rate inorganic

12

fertilizer (Tr 10 565 per m2) which differed significantly (Plt005) from its FYM

counterpart Treatment 5 There was however no consistent difference between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts and no overall effect of form of fertilizer

within the FRF series (P=0745) There was a significant form x rate interaction within

this ANOVA (P=0032) but only the difference between the high rate and lower rate

inorganic means was significant (high rategtlower rate Plt001)

The aggregate contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator species (NI)

showed a very marked divergence between treatments over time (Fig 1d) with NI

either changing little or declining under most treatments again with the notable exception

of high rate annual FYM (Tr 5) under which NI increased over time Time treatment

and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001) The

predominant temporal trend was downward (from 25 of live cover in 1999 to 14 in

2010 averaged over all treatments) but NI for Treatment 5 had significantly increased

compared to 1999 in 2002 2003 (Plt005) 2005 (Plt0001) 2008 (Plt0001) and 2009

(Plt001) but not in 2010 (Fig 1d) The most marked declines in NI occurred on the

limed control (Tr 2) nil fertilizer plus lime in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) and the lower

rate triennial inorganic fertilizer treatments (Tr 11) differences compared to both 1999

and 2002 were highly significant (Plt0001) in most subsequent years for these

treatments A smaller decline also occurred after 2002 on the treatment equivalent to past

inputs (ie12 t ha-1

year-1

annual FYM Tr 4) In most years this treatment differed little

from the equivalent FYM treatment limed in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 14)

These trends were reflected in highly significant overall effects on NI within the FRF

series of form (FYMgtinorganic) rate (mediumlthigh) and frequency (triennialltannual)

(all effects Plt0001) Time x rate and time x frequency interactions were both significant

(P=0019 and Plt0001 respectively) with a marginally non-significant rate x frequency

interaction averaged over all years (P=0054) NI declined over time under both

application rates averaged over forms and frequencies of application but the decline was

slower with high rate treatments compared to lower rate Difference between rates were

significant in all years from 2002 onwards (Plt005 in 2002 2006 and 2007 Plt0001 in

other years) Overall differences due to frequency of application were even more marked

Under annual application NI declined initially from 2003-2006 compared to 1999 but

subsequently recovered and did not differ from 1999 levels from 2007 onwards whilst

under triennial application differences were highly significant (Plt0001) compared to

1999 from 2003 onwards with significant differences between years during this same

period (Plt005 in 2003 and 2006 Plt0001 in remaining years)

Repeated-measures ANOVAs within the LFF treatment series at the upland meadow

showed no overall effect of liming regime on temporal trends for any of the above

variables nor any interaction of lime with either time or FYM frequency - note that FYM

was applied at the intermediate rate (12 t ha-1

) in all FYM treatments within this series

The overall effect of FYM frequency was significant for both PI (P=0003) and the

number of NI species m-2

(P=0001) PI was highest with nil FYM and lowest with

annual FYM with triennial intermediate and differing significantly (Plt005) from the

other two means NI species m-2

did not differ between triennial and annual application

within the LFF series but both were significantly higher than nil FYM (Plt001 for

triennial Plt0001 for annual application) There was also a significant time x FYM

frequency interaction for NI within this series (P=0001) reflecting a more rapid

13

decline with nil FYM than with triennial FYM and no significant overall trend with

annual FYM when averaged over both lime treatments

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Spe

cie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime Year 1 + ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr 1)

a Species richness (total)

2

3

4

5

6

7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

Fig 2 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition at a lowland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control treatment and those that had received lime in year 1

Treatments 1 and 2 were identical (nil input) until 2005

The lowland meadow

Both time and treatment were significant within the ANOVA for total species-richness at

the lowland meadow (Plt0001 and P=0009 respectively and in contrast to the upland

site the treatment x time interaction was significant (P=0012) Averaged over all years

high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was significantly less species-rich than all others

except Treatment 14 (annual FYM at 12 t ha-1

limed in 1999) having declined

progressively between 1999 and 2009 (Fig 2a) with most differences significant at

Plt001 Treatment 14 did not differ significantly overall compared to the corresponding

FYM treatment not limed until 2005 (Tr 4) although these two treatments showed

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 4: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

4

Past management

Both meadows had previously been managed over a long period by cutting for hay with aftermath

grazing Cutting occurred after 1 July at the upland meadow and after the second week in July at

the lowland meadow The upland meadow had received about 12 t FYM ha-1

each year usually in

late April but occasionally in mid summer following the hay harvest and had received periodic

applications of lime (amounts not known) the last one in about 1993 Details of past fertilizer

application at the lowland meadow are uncertain although this site had not received any form of

fertilizer or lime in the preceding 20 years or more there is some evidence to suggest that basic

slag and lime may have been applied at some time before that

Soil properties

Soils at the upland meadow were clay-loam in texture whilst those at the lowland meadow were

a mixture of sandy silt loam to silty clay-loam The upland meadow soils were notably higher in

total N carbon and organic matter (Table 1)

Table 1 Soil chemical properties (top 75 cm) at experimental sites in Cumbria (the upland

meadow) and Wales (the lowland meadow) in 1999

Upland meadow Lowland meadow

Mean Range Mean Range

pH 518 512-527 501 494-511

Total N 065 059-071 034 029-039

C 676 615-776 315 266-351

Organic matter 1718 1577-2069 903 801-973

Olsen extractable P (mg l-1

) 550 444-679 512 410-600

Exchangeable K (mg l-1

) 1971 1629-2479 1747 1323-2205

Exchangeable Mg (mg l-1

) 1548 1368-1957 2014 1606-2389

Exchangeable Ca (mg l-1

) 1480 1334-1723 1047 852-1214

Measured by loss on ignition (LOI)

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

All experimental treatments (see Table 2) were applied by hand to individual 7m x 5m plots laid

out in a randomized block design with three replicate blocks at each site Treatments were applied

between March and late April Due to access restrictions resulting from the national outbreak of

Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) no treatment was applied in 2001 This meant that treatments

requiring annual applications only received a total of 1112 (92) of the intended amounts over

the 12 year period 1999-2010 Triennial treatments were applied in 1999 2002 2005 and 2008

5

Table 2 Treatments applied 1999-2010 at the upland and lowland meadows Values are the mean

amounts applied (kg ha-1

year-1

elemental N P and K) either as FYM (estimated) or in inorganic

form (actual) averaged over 12 yearsa 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed only in both

1999 and 2005 at the upland site but in 1999 only at the lowland site Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Upland meadow Lowland meadow

Treatment N P K N P K

1 Untreated control 00 00 00 00 00 00

2 Limed (in 2005) control 00 00 00 00 00 00

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 44 50 345 29 38 292

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 88 100 689 57 76 585

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 176 199 1378

114 151 1169

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 15 22 113 09 13 110

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 30 45 226

19 26 221

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 61 90 452

38 52 441

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 85 84 689 61 63 585

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 170 168 1378

121 125 1169

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 30 36 226

24 21 221

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 61 72 452

48 42 441

13 Lime in years 1 (and 7) 00 00 00 00 00 00

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 88 100 689 57 76 585

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 30 45 226 19 26 221 aNote that no fertilizer was applied in 2001 so that for annual treatments the amounts shown

are 1112ths of the mean amount applied in each of the remaining years

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime

in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

The FYM used in the experiment was sourced locally from the same farms each year and was

sampled at the time of application for subsequent chemical analysis The ADAS Manure Nitrogen

Evaluation Routine (MANNER Chambers et al 1999) was used between 1999 and 2006 to

predict the amount of plant available N supplied by the FYM after which a refined model

(MANNER-NPK Nicholson et al 2010) was used Refinements to the model included more

detailed N mineralisation functions and predictions of N availability in the year following

application Availabilities of 60 and 90 of total P and K respectively (Anon 2010) were

assumed between 1999 and 2006 and this assumption for K was maintained throughout the 1999-

2010 period From 2007 onwards the assumed availability of P from FYM was increased to 80

of total P in line with information on longer term release of plant-available P from FYM (Smith

et al 1998) For both N and P the mean amounts assumed to have been applied in FYM

treatments averaged over 1999-2010 and shown in Table 2 are based upon revised estimates for

the whole period The inorganic fertilizer N treatments applied each year ie the inorganic

lsquoequivalentsrsquo for specific FYM treatments (see Table 2) were based upon estimates made using

the original MANNER model from 1999-2006 and MANNER-NPK from 2007-2010 Similarly

6

the inorganic fertilizer P applied each year corresponded to 60 of the total P in FYM between

1999 and 2006 and 80 from 2007-2010

Inorganic N P and K were applied as ammonium nitrate triple super-phosphate and muriate of

potash respectively to the relevant treatments The FYM treatments were designed to encompass

the range of inputs traditionally applied to species-rich hay meadows upon which current agri-

environment guidelines are based (Simpson and Jefferson 1996 Crofts and Jefferson 1999)

Lime was applied to treatments 13 14 and 15 only at each site in March-April 1999 and to most

treatments in 2005 (Table 2) The latter included the three previously limed treatments at the

upland meadow but not at the lowland one since soil pH levels had not fallen significantly by

2005 on these plots at the latter site Based on assessments of soil texture and soil pH tests

conducted in February-March the amounts of lime were calculated to be sufficient to raise the

soil pH of the experimental plots to 60 (Anon 2010)

At each site one plot per replicate block received no fertilizer or lime (untreated control)

between 1999 and 2005 whilst another plot per replicate was designated as a continuation of past

fertilizer inputs At the lowland meadow the latter was identical to the untreated control

treatment but at the upland meadow it was identical to Treatment 4 (12 t ha-1

FYM annually) In

2005 a decision was made to treat occasional liming as lsquobackgroundrsquo management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites to be triggered for each treatment in future years once mean pH

for that treatment had declined to 55 whilst retaining both an untreated control (ie nil fertilizer

nil lime ndash Treatment 1) and a nil fertilizer (limed in 2005) control treatment (Treatment 2) at each

site The rationale behind this decision is addressed in the Discussion section At the lowland

meadow one of the two hitherto untreated control plots per replicate (Treatment 2) was therefore

limed in 2005 along with other treatments Only one nil input plot per replicate was available at

the upland meadow but since the site had a history of liming the existing nil input plots were

limed in 2005 (Treatment 2) and new untreated control plots (Treatment 1) were established

adjacent to each replicate block with the end at which each was located chosen randomly for

each block

The experimental plots were cut for hay after 1 July each year at the upland site and after 15

July at the lowland site the actual cutting date being dependent on weather conditions The hay

aftermath growth was grazed each year with experimental plots being grazed with the remainder

of the field At the upland meadow mature sheep were used normally commencing in September-

October continuing until March or late April The lowland meadow was grazed by beef store

cattle from mid Octoberearly November to late February

Botanical assessments were carried out during May each year except in 2001 at the upland

meadow due to FMD restrictions The percentage cover of each species present was estimated

visually in three 1m2 quadrats positioned at random within each plot in 1999 and then fixed for

the project duration

Soils were sampled in March 1999 2002 2004 2007 and 2010 by taking five 35 mm diameter x

75mm deep soil cores at random from within each treatment plot but outside the fixed positions

of the three 1m2 botanical survey quadrats The five samples per plot were combined dried at

30oC and then ground prior to analysis for organic carbon (C) total nitrogen (N) Olsen

extractable P exchangeable potassium (K) magnesium (Mg) calcium (Ca) sodium (Na) and pH

(in H2O) using standard laboratory methods (Allen 1974 MAFF 1986)

Soils were further sampled in June 1999 2002 2004 2007 and 2010 for soil microbial

assessment by taking five 35 mm diameter x 100 mm deep cores which were subsequently bulked

for each plot sieved (5 mm) and stored at 4oC prior to analysis Microbial community structure

was assessed using phospholipid fatty acid analysis (PLFA) as described by Bardgett et al

(1996) The fatty acids i150 a150 150 i160 170 i170 cy170 cis181ω7 and cy190 were

chosen to represent bacterial PLFAs (Federle 1986 Frostegaringrd Tunlid amp Baringaringth 1993) and

182ω6 was used as an indicator of fungal biomass (Federle 1986) The ratio of 182ω6bacterial

7

PLFAs was taken to represent the ratio of fungal-to-bacterial biomass in soil (Bardgett Hobbs amp

Frostegaringrd 1996 Frostegaringrd amp Baringaringth 1996)

DERIVED BOTANICAL VARIABLES

Estimates of cover for individual species were converted to a percentage of the total live

vegetation cover present in each quadrat in order to minimize the effects of year-to-year variation

and variation between treatments in vegetation density and total cover Several composite

variables were calculated to characterize the vegetation and these were then averaged across the

three quadrats in each plot to give plot mean values for each variable Plot means were then used

as the basic units for subsequent analyses of treatment effects

Key variables

Five key variables were used to investigate the effects of treatment and time on botanical

composition total species-richness (the total number of vascular plant species per m2) the

number per m2 of MG3 and MG5 positive indicator species (the upland and lowland meadows

respectively) the aggregate cover of these species as a percentage of total vegetation cover the

number per m2 of negative indicator species and the aggregate cover of negative indicator

species as a percentage of total vegetation cover Positive mesotrophic indicator species were

identified from lists produced by Robertson and Jefferson (2000) for use in monitoring the

condition of grassland Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) in MG3 (Anthoxanthum

odoratum-Geranium sylvaticum grassland) and MG5 (Cynosurus cristatus-Centaurea nigra

grassland) communities of the NVC (Rodwell 1992) A single list of negative indicator species

was compiled from the generic negative indicators for MG3 and MG5 communities (Robertson amp

Jefferson 2000) augmented by species shown in previous work (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996) to be favoured by nutrient addition and for which an increase in abundance

would indicate a negative effect on plant community quality Positive and negative indicator

species are listed in Supporting Information Table S3

Additional variables

Among other derived variables was the weighted Ellenberg N score (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham

et al 2008) referred to hereafter as the fertility score The Ellenberg N index represents the

degree of association with soil fertility (not specifically soil N) of a particular species (Ellenberg

1988 Hill et al 1999) Fertility scores were calculated for each quadrat as the average N index

of the component species weighted according to the proportional contribution of each species to

total vegetation cover Plot mean fertility scores were highly correlated at both sites with the

aggregate cover of negative indicator species (NI) (Pearson r=0845 and r=0927 at the upland

and lowland sites respectively in 2010 both Plt0001) The latter variable was preferred to

fertility scores for statistical analyses in this paper because it proved more responsive to fertilizer

treatments although fertility scores are referred to in the Discussion section in relation to results

from elsewhere

DATA ANALYSIS

ANOVAs for treatment effects

For each of the key variables botanical data for all years 1999-2010 except 2001 at the upland

meadow and for all treatments except Treatment 1 at the same meadow were analyzed by

repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA - Genstat V Committee 1997) with Year as the

repeated measures factor Separate ANOVAs were carried out for each variable within each site

using three separate ANOVA models in each case In each model variation between replicate

8

blocks was accounted for by treating replicate as a blocking factor The first model included all

the treatments except Treatment 1 at the upland meadow whilst the other two models used

balanced factorial subsets (series) of treatments (see Table 2) the Form x Rate x Frequency

(FRF) series and the Lime x FYM frequency (LFF) series

The FRF series tested the effects of form of fertilizer (ie FYM or inorganic) the rate at which

fertilizers were applied (12 or 24 t FYM ha-1

and inorganic treatments corresponding to these)

the frequency at which treatments were applied (ie annual or triennially) and all two- and three-

way interactions between these factors

The LFF series tested the effects of liming regime ie lime in 1999 (and 2005 at the upland site)

versus lime in 2005 only the frequency of FYM application (ie nil annual or triennially) and the

Lime x FYM frequency interaction All FYM treatments within this series were applied at 12 t ha-

1 At both sites the LFF series consisted of Treatments 2 4 7 13 14 and 15 (see Table 2) The

liming comparison therefore differed slightly between the two sites since liming was repeated in

2005 on plots previously limed in 1999 at the upland meadow but not repeated at the lowland

one

In both the LFF and the FRF models for each variable the first stratum of the ANOVA

consisted of the effects of all factors and interactions averaged over time with the same factors

and interactions repeated in the second stratum with time as an additional factor

In all repeated measures ANOVAs to account for the repeated measures aspect all degrees of

freedom in the Year x Treatment stratum were adjusted to account for departure from

homogeneity of the population covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the

Greenhouse-Geisser method (Genstat V Committee 1997)

In most years including 2010 all species were recorded individually but at both sites

bryophytes were recorded only as a single group in some years This had only a small influence

on the data since there were seldom more than two bryophyte species present in a quadrat and

more often less Nevertheless for consistency between years bryophytes were treated as a single

group in all years when calculating total species-richness for data for repeated measures

ANOVAs

In addition to the above analyses 2010 data for the key variables were tested alone for treatment

effects by ANOVA and by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) the latter using 1999 data as the

covariate (Genstat 5 Committee 1997) All three models as described above were tested The

ANCOVAs for the upland meadow excluded Treatment 1 (untreated control plots established in

2005) Where an ANCOVA showed significant treatment covariance with 1999 data the adjusted

results were used In other cases the unadjusted analyses were used Individual bryophyte species

were included in the calculations of species-richness at both sites in these analyses

In all analyses in order to satisfy the conditions for ANOVA (normality of residuals and

homogeneity of residual variation) all percentage data were transformed before analysis by

arcsine(radicp) where p is the percentage value expressed as a proportion All results quoted for

percentage data refer to analyses of arcsine-square root transformed data

Mixed modeling

Mixed model analysis (Residual Estimated Maximum Likelihood ndash REML Genstat V

Committee 1997) was used to identify any effect of form rate or frequency of application on

vegetation composition at each site in 2010 not simply attributable to the total (or mean per year)

amount of fertilizer applied over the study period A variable representing this amount was

included as a continuous explanatory variable in each analysis along with other fixed factors

form rate and frequency of application (Block was included as a random factor) Since the total

(or mean) amounts of N P and K applied over the whole period were completely correlated

across treatments at each site it was not feasible to include all three elements as separate terms in

the model Nor was it feasible to simply use a single notional variable for fertilizer amount (eg t

9

FYM ha-1

year-1

or inorganic equivalent) since there was lack of equivalence of N and P supply

(but not K) between individual FYM treatments and their corresponding inorganic treatments For

each dependent variable tested two separate models were therefore developed using either N or

P ha-1

year-1

as the continuous variable In each case the presence of any non-linearity in response

was tested by including a quadratic term (ie N2 or P

2) or where more appropriate by logn-

transformation of the explanatory variable

For each analysis an initial model was constructed that included all five main effects and all

interactions The importance of each term was evaluated initially by a χ2 test on the Wald statistic

(Genstat V Committee 1997) The number and order of terms in the model were varied but with

N or P amount always included until a model was developed in which each term was significant

The model was then refined by testing the contribution of each term to the model by the more

conservative deviance test ie a χ2 test on the difference in deviance between the model

containing the term and a sub-model from which it was dropped (Welham amp Thompson 1997)

Where there was an interaction between form of fertilizer and the quadratic term but no overall

effect of form - implying that the difference between the two forms of fertilizer lay primarily in a

difference in the curvilinearity of response - a refined model was tested with the P2 (or N

2) x

Form term replaced by Form nested within the quadratic term (eg P2Form) This has the effect

of absorbing the overall effect of form of fertilizer within the interaction term and returns the two

terms P2 and P

2 x Form (Galwey 2006)

These modeling approaches were used with total species-richness and PI species-richness as

(separate) response variables and included data for all treatments limed in 2005 but not in 1999

(ie Trs 2-12)

Results

TEMPORAL CHANGES 1999-2010

Changes over time in total species-richness (number per m2) richness and proportional

aggregate cover of positive indicator (PI) species and proportional aggregate cover of

negative indicator (NI) species at the upland and lowland meadows are represented in

Figs 1 and 2 respectively for ten of the fifteen treatments applied Repeated measures

ANOVA statistics for each of the four variables are given in Supporting Information

Tables S4 S6 S8 and S10 respectively for the upland meadow and Tables S12 S14 S16

and S18 respectively for the lowland meadow Corresponding mean values for each

treatment in each year are given in Tables S5 S7 S9 S11 S13 S15 S17 and S19

respectively Changes in individual species abundance contributing to the temporal trends

in aggregated PI and NI species described below are outlined under Supporting

Information

The upland meadow

The overall effects of both treatment and time were highly significant in the repeated

measures ANOVA for total species-richness at the upland meadow (both P=0001) but

there was no treatment x time interaction (P=0647)

After an initial decline between 1999 and 2000 species-richness remained fairly

constant for most treatments until 2003 after which there was a general increase with the

notable exception of the highest rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) (Fig 1a) The latter

treatment declined further between 2005 and 2007 after which it appeared to recover

slightly and averaged over all years this treatment was significantly less species-rich than

all others (Plt001 compared to Tr 14 Plt0001 the remainder) None of the remaining

10

treatments differed significantly from the limed control treatment (Tr2) averaged over all

years However the more species-rich treatments ie nil fertilizer plus lime applied in

both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) low rate annual and medium rate triennial FYM (Tr 3 and 7

respectively) and the inorganic equivalent to the latter (Tr 11) were all more species-rich

averaged over all years (Plt005) than annual FYM at the medium rate under either

liming regime (ie Trs 4 and 14 the former representing a continuation of past

management)

The effect of the high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was largely responsible for

several main effects within the repeated measures ANOVA of treatments within the Form

x Rate x Frequency (FRF) factorial series namely overall effects (averaged over all

years) of rate (mediumgthigh P=0002) and frequency (triennialgtannual P=0001) of

application and a not quite significant effect of form of fertilizer (FYMltinorganic

P=0057) Both the form x rate and the form x frequency interactions were significant

(both Plt005) high rate FYM was significantly less species-rich than all other

combinations averaged over annual and three yearly treatments and all years (Plt0001

compared to medium rate FYM Plt001 compared to both medium and high rate

inorganic fertilizer) and annual FYM was less species-rich than three yearly FYM and

than inorganic fertilizer either annually or triennial (all Plt0001) averaged over the two

application rates and all years The rate x frequency interaction was not significant

(P=0105) but there was a marginally non-significant three-way interaction between

form rate and frequency (P=0070) with a low mean for high rate annual FYM (Tr 5

211 species m-2

) contrasting markedly with all other treatments within the series

particularly with low rate triennial FYM (Tr 6 267 species m-2

)

As with the full treatment ANOVA the overall time factor was highly significant

(Plt0001) but only the effect of application frequency varied significantly with time

(interaction Plt005) Species-richness declined slightly with annual treatments overall

and increased slightly with triennial treatments such that differences between these were

significant in all years from 2005 onwards (Plt001 for 2006-2009 Plt005 in 2005 and

2010)

Both the richness and aggregate cover of PI species (PI) increased generally with time

(Fig 1b and 1c) although in both cases there was a progressive separation between

species The temporal trend was particularly marked for PI although the time factor

was highly significant (Plt0001) in both ANOVAs The overall treatment effect was

marginally non-significant for PI richness (P=0069) with no indication of a time x

treatment interaction (P=0703) whereas for PI there was both a significant treatment

effect (P=0002) and a marginally non-significant treatment x time interaction (P=0075)

Mean PI was significantly lower averaged over all years for annual FYM treatments at

both 12 and 24 t ha-1

(ie Trs 4 14 and 5) compared to several other treatments notably

nil fertilizer treatments limed either in 2005 only (Tr 2 limed control) or in both 1999

and 2005 (Tr 13) (all differences Plt0001 except Tr 2 vs Tr 4 Plt001) and triennial

inorganic treatments (Trs 11 and 12 Plt001 except for Tr 4 vs Tr 11 Plt005) Within

the FRF series ANOVA the increase in PI over time was greater with triennial

treatments compared to annual averaged over fertilizer forms and rates of application

(time x frequency interaction P=0016) with a marked overall difference due to

application frequency averaged over forms rates and all years (P=0005)

11

PI species-richness showed a similar overall effect of application frequency within the

FRF series (triennialgtannual P=0013) and also a significant overall effect of rate of

application (medium rategthigh rate P=0022) The overall effect of form of fertilizer was

marginally non-significant (FYMltinorganic P=0059) and there was no significant

interaction among any of the three factors averaged over all years nor any interaction

with time

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Specie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime in Year 1+ ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime in Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr1)

a Species richness (total)

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

Fig 1 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition an upland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control

The mean number of negative indicator (NI) species per m2 averaged over all treatments

varied significantly over time at the upland meadow (P=0002 data not shown) though

with no consistent trend - it was lowest overall in 2002 (499 per m2) and highest in both

1999 and 2008 (548 per m2) The treatment x time interaction was not significant

(P=0469) but the overall treatment effect was highly significant (Plt0001) mean

number of NI species per m2 was higher than the limed control (Tr 1 453 per m

2) with

all fertilizer treatments except Treatments 11 (triennial inorganic fertilizer at the lower

rate) and 13 (nil fertilizer limed in both 1999 and 2005) (Plt0001 for all except Trs 5

and 6 for which Plt001) The highest mean NI m-2

value was for high rate inorganic

12

fertilizer (Tr 10 565 per m2) which differed significantly (Plt005) from its FYM

counterpart Treatment 5 There was however no consistent difference between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts and no overall effect of form of fertilizer

within the FRF series (P=0745) There was a significant form x rate interaction within

this ANOVA (P=0032) but only the difference between the high rate and lower rate

inorganic means was significant (high rategtlower rate Plt001)

The aggregate contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator species (NI)

showed a very marked divergence between treatments over time (Fig 1d) with NI

either changing little or declining under most treatments again with the notable exception

of high rate annual FYM (Tr 5) under which NI increased over time Time treatment

and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001) The

predominant temporal trend was downward (from 25 of live cover in 1999 to 14 in

2010 averaged over all treatments) but NI for Treatment 5 had significantly increased

compared to 1999 in 2002 2003 (Plt005) 2005 (Plt0001) 2008 (Plt0001) and 2009

(Plt001) but not in 2010 (Fig 1d) The most marked declines in NI occurred on the

limed control (Tr 2) nil fertilizer plus lime in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) and the lower

rate triennial inorganic fertilizer treatments (Tr 11) differences compared to both 1999

and 2002 were highly significant (Plt0001) in most subsequent years for these

treatments A smaller decline also occurred after 2002 on the treatment equivalent to past

inputs (ie12 t ha-1

year-1

annual FYM Tr 4) In most years this treatment differed little

from the equivalent FYM treatment limed in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 14)

These trends were reflected in highly significant overall effects on NI within the FRF

series of form (FYMgtinorganic) rate (mediumlthigh) and frequency (triennialltannual)

(all effects Plt0001) Time x rate and time x frequency interactions were both significant

(P=0019 and Plt0001 respectively) with a marginally non-significant rate x frequency

interaction averaged over all years (P=0054) NI declined over time under both

application rates averaged over forms and frequencies of application but the decline was

slower with high rate treatments compared to lower rate Difference between rates were

significant in all years from 2002 onwards (Plt005 in 2002 2006 and 2007 Plt0001 in

other years) Overall differences due to frequency of application were even more marked

Under annual application NI declined initially from 2003-2006 compared to 1999 but

subsequently recovered and did not differ from 1999 levels from 2007 onwards whilst

under triennial application differences were highly significant (Plt0001) compared to

1999 from 2003 onwards with significant differences between years during this same

period (Plt005 in 2003 and 2006 Plt0001 in remaining years)

Repeated-measures ANOVAs within the LFF treatment series at the upland meadow

showed no overall effect of liming regime on temporal trends for any of the above

variables nor any interaction of lime with either time or FYM frequency - note that FYM

was applied at the intermediate rate (12 t ha-1

) in all FYM treatments within this series

The overall effect of FYM frequency was significant for both PI (P=0003) and the

number of NI species m-2

(P=0001) PI was highest with nil FYM and lowest with

annual FYM with triennial intermediate and differing significantly (Plt005) from the

other two means NI species m-2

did not differ between triennial and annual application

within the LFF series but both were significantly higher than nil FYM (Plt001 for

triennial Plt0001 for annual application) There was also a significant time x FYM

frequency interaction for NI within this series (P=0001) reflecting a more rapid

13

decline with nil FYM than with triennial FYM and no significant overall trend with

annual FYM when averaged over both lime treatments

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Spe

cie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime Year 1 + ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr 1)

a Species richness (total)

2

3

4

5

6

7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

Fig 2 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition at a lowland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control treatment and those that had received lime in year 1

Treatments 1 and 2 were identical (nil input) until 2005

The lowland meadow

Both time and treatment were significant within the ANOVA for total species-richness at

the lowland meadow (Plt0001 and P=0009 respectively and in contrast to the upland

site the treatment x time interaction was significant (P=0012) Averaged over all years

high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was significantly less species-rich than all others

except Treatment 14 (annual FYM at 12 t ha-1

limed in 1999) having declined

progressively between 1999 and 2009 (Fig 2a) with most differences significant at

Plt001 Treatment 14 did not differ significantly overall compared to the corresponding

FYM treatment not limed until 2005 (Tr 4) although these two treatments showed

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 5: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

5

Table 2 Treatments applied 1999-2010 at the upland and lowland meadows Values are the mean

amounts applied (kg ha-1

year-1

elemental N P and K) either as FYM (estimated) or in inorganic

form (actual) averaged over 12 yearsa 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed only in both

1999 and 2005 at the upland site but in 1999 only at the lowland site Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Upland meadow Lowland meadow

Treatment N P K N P K

1 Untreated control 00 00 00 00 00 00

2 Limed (in 2005) control 00 00 00 00 00 00

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 44 50 345 29 38 292

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 88 100 689 57 76 585

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 176 199 1378

114 151 1169

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 15 22 113 09 13 110

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 30 45 226

19 26 221

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 61 90 452

38 52 441

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 85 84 689 61 63 585

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 170 168 1378

121 125 1169

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 30 36 226

24 21 221

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 61 72 452

48 42 441

13 Lime in years 1 (and 7) 00 00 00 00 00 00

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 88 100 689 57 76 585

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 30 45 226 19 26 221 aNote that no fertilizer was applied in 2001 so that for annual treatments the amounts shown

are 1112ths of the mean amount applied in each of the remaining years

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime

in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

The FYM used in the experiment was sourced locally from the same farms each year and was

sampled at the time of application for subsequent chemical analysis The ADAS Manure Nitrogen

Evaluation Routine (MANNER Chambers et al 1999) was used between 1999 and 2006 to

predict the amount of plant available N supplied by the FYM after which a refined model

(MANNER-NPK Nicholson et al 2010) was used Refinements to the model included more

detailed N mineralisation functions and predictions of N availability in the year following

application Availabilities of 60 and 90 of total P and K respectively (Anon 2010) were

assumed between 1999 and 2006 and this assumption for K was maintained throughout the 1999-

2010 period From 2007 onwards the assumed availability of P from FYM was increased to 80

of total P in line with information on longer term release of plant-available P from FYM (Smith

et al 1998) For both N and P the mean amounts assumed to have been applied in FYM

treatments averaged over 1999-2010 and shown in Table 2 are based upon revised estimates for

the whole period The inorganic fertilizer N treatments applied each year ie the inorganic

lsquoequivalentsrsquo for specific FYM treatments (see Table 2) were based upon estimates made using

the original MANNER model from 1999-2006 and MANNER-NPK from 2007-2010 Similarly

6

the inorganic fertilizer P applied each year corresponded to 60 of the total P in FYM between

1999 and 2006 and 80 from 2007-2010

Inorganic N P and K were applied as ammonium nitrate triple super-phosphate and muriate of

potash respectively to the relevant treatments The FYM treatments were designed to encompass

the range of inputs traditionally applied to species-rich hay meadows upon which current agri-

environment guidelines are based (Simpson and Jefferson 1996 Crofts and Jefferson 1999)

Lime was applied to treatments 13 14 and 15 only at each site in March-April 1999 and to most

treatments in 2005 (Table 2) The latter included the three previously limed treatments at the

upland meadow but not at the lowland one since soil pH levels had not fallen significantly by

2005 on these plots at the latter site Based on assessments of soil texture and soil pH tests

conducted in February-March the amounts of lime were calculated to be sufficient to raise the

soil pH of the experimental plots to 60 (Anon 2010)

At each site one plot per replicate block received no fertilizer or lime (untreated control)

between 1999 and 2005 whilst another plot per replicate was designated as a continuation of past

fertilizer inputs At the lowland meadow the latter was identical to the untreated control

treatment but at the upland meadow it was identical to Treatment 4 (12 t ha-1

FYM annually) In

2005 a decision was made to treat occasional liming as lsquobackgroundrsquo management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites to be triggered for each treatment in future years once mean pH

for that treatment had declined to 55 whilst retaining both an untreated control (ie nil fertilizer

nil lime ndash Treatment 1) and a nil fertilizer (limed in 2005) control treatment (Treatment 2) at each

site The rationale behind this decision is addressed in the Discussion section At the lowland

meadow one of the two hitherto untreated control plots per replicate (Treatment 2) was therefore

limed in 2005 along with other treatments Only one nil input plot per replicate was available at

the upland meadow but since the site had a history of liming the existing nil input plots were

limed in 2005 (Treatment 2) and new untreated control plots (Treatment 1) were established

adjacent to each replicate block with the end at which each was located chosen randomly for

each block

The experimental plots were cut for hay after 1 July each year at the upland site and after 15

July at the lowland site the actual cutting date being dependent on weather conditions The hay

aftermath growth was grazed each year with experimental plots being grazed with the remainder

of the field At the upland meadow mature sheep were used normally commencing in September-

October continuing until March or late April The lowland meadow was grazed by beef store

cattle from mid Octoberearly November to late February

Botanical assessments were carried out during May each year except in 2001 at the upland

meadow due to FMD restrictions The percentage cover of each species present was estimated

visually in three 1m2 quadrats positioned at random within each plot in 1999 and then fixed for

the project duration

Soils were sampled in March 1999 2002 2004 2007 and 2010 by taking five 35 mm diameter x

75mm deep soil cores at random from within each treatment plot but outside the fixed positions

of the three 1m2 botanical survey quadrats The five samples per plot were combined dried at

30oC and then ground prior to analysis for organic carbon (C) total nitrogen (N) Olsen

extractable P exchangeable potassium (K) magnesium (Mg) calcium (Ca) sodium (Na) and pH

(in H2O) using standard laboratory methods (Allen 1974 MAFF 1986)

Soils were further sampled in June 1999 2002 2004 2007 and 2010 for soil microbial

assessment by taking five 35 mm diameter x 100 mm deep cores which were subsequently bulked

for each plot sieved (5 mm) and stored at 4oC prior to analysis Microbial community structure

was assessed using phospholipid fatty acid analysis (PLFA) as described by Bardgett et al

(1996) The fatty acids i150 a150 150 i160 170 i170 cy170 cis181ω7 and cy190 were

chosen to represent bacterial PLFAs (Federle 1986 Frostegaringrd Tunlid amp Baringaringth 1993) and

182ω6 was used as an indicator of fungal biomass (Federle 1986) The ratio of 182ω6bacterial

7

PLFAs was taken to represent the ratio of fungal-to-bacterial biomass in soil (Bardgett Hobbs amp

Frostegaringrd 1996 Frostegaringrd amp Baringaringth 1996)

DERIVED BOTANICAL VARIABLES

Estimates of cover for individual species were converted to a percentage of the total live

vegetation cover present in each quadrat in order to minimize the effects of year-to-year variation

and variation between treatments in vegetation density and total cover Several composite

variables were calculated to characterize the vegetation and these were then averaged across the

three quadrats in each plot to give plot mean values for each variable Plot means were then used

as the basic units for subsequent analyses of treatment effects

Key variables

Five key variables were used to investigate the effects of treatment and time on botanical

composition total species-richness (the total number of vascular plant species per m2) the

number per m2 of MG3 and MG5 positive indicator species (the upland and lowland meadows

respectively) the aggregate cover of these species as a percentage of total vegetation cover the

number per m2 of negative indicator species and the aggregate cover of negative indicator

species as a percentage of total vegetation cover Positive mesotrophic indicator species were

identified from lists produced by Robertson and Jefferson (2000) for use in monitoring the

condition of grassland Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) in MG3 (Anthoxanthum

odoratum-Geranium sylvaticum grassland) and MG5 (Cynosurus cristatus-Centaurea nigra

grassland) communities of the NVC (Rodwell 1992) A single list of negative indicator species

was compiled from the generic negative indicators for MG3 and MG5 communities (Robertson amp

Jefferson 2000) augmented by species shown in previous work (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996) to be favoured by nutrient addition and for which an increase in abundance

would indicate a negative effect on plant community quality Positive and negative indicator

species are listed in Supporting Information Table S3

Additional variables

Among other derived variables was the weighted Ellenberg N score (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham

et al 2008) referred to hereafter as the fertility score The Ellenberg N index represents the

degree of association with soil fertility (not specifically soil N) of a particular species (Ellenberg

1988 Hill et al 1999) Fertility scores were calculated for each quadrat as the average N index

of the component species weighted according to the proportional contribution of each species to

total vegetation cover Plot mean fertility scores were highly correlated at both sites with the

aggregate cover of negative indicator species (NI) (Pearson r=0845 and r=0927 at the upland

and lowland sites respectively in 2010 both Plt0001) The latter variable was preferred to

fertility scores for statistical analyses in this paper because it proved more responsive to fertilizer

treatments although fertility scores are referred to in the Discussion section in relation to results

from elsewhere

DATA ANALYSIS

ANOVAs for treatment effects

For each of the key variables botanical data for all years 1999-2010 except 2001 at the upland

meadow and for all treatments except Treatment 1 at the same meadow were analyzed by

repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA - Genstat V Committee 1997) with Year as the

repeated measures factor Separate ANOVAs were carried out for each variable within each site

using three separate ANOVA models in each case In each model variation between replicate

8

blocks was accounted for by treating replicate as a blocking factor The first model included all

the treatments except Treatment 1 at the upland meadow whilst the other two models used

balanced factorial subsets (series) of treatments (see Table 2) the Form x Rate x Frequency

(FRF) series and the Lime x FYM frequency (LFF) series

The FRF series tested the effects of form of fertilizer (ie FYM or inorganic) the rate at which

fertilizers were applied (12 or 24 t FYM ha-1

and inorganic treatments corresponding to these)

the frequency at which treatments were applied (ie annual or triennially) and all two- and three-

way interactions between these factors

The LFF series tested the effects of liming regime ie lime in 1999 (and 2005 at the upland site)

versus lime in 2005 only the frequency of FYM application (ie nil annual or triennially) and the

Lime x FYM frequency interaction All FYM treatments within this series were applied at 12 t ha-

1 At both sites the LFF series consisted of Treatments 2 4 7 13 14 and 15 (see Table 2) The

liming comparison therefore differed slightly between the two sites since liming was repeated in

2005 on plots previously limed in 1999 at the upland meadow but not repeated at the lowland

one

In both the LFF and the FRF models for each variable the first stratum of the ANOVA

consisted of the effects of all factors and interactions averaged over time with the same factors

and interactions repeated in the second stratum with time as an additional factor

In all repeated measures ANOVAs to account for the repeated measures aspect all degrees of

freedom in the Year x Treatment stratum were adjusted to account for departure from

homogeneity of the population covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the

Greenhouse-Geisser method (Genstat V Committee 1997)

In most years including 2010 all species were recorded individually but at both sites

bryophytes were recorded only as a single group in some years This had only a small influence

on the data since there were seldom more than two bryophyte species present in a quadrat and

more often less Nevertheless for consistency between years bryophytes were treated as a single

group in all years when calculating total species-richness for data for repeated measures

ANOVAs

In addition to the above analyses 2010 data for the key variables were tested alone for treatment

effects by ANOVA and by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) the latter using 1999 data as the

covariate (Genstat 5 Committee 1997) All three models as described above were tested The

ANCOVAs for the upland meadow excluded Treatment 1 (untreated control plots established in

2005) Where an ANCOVA showed significant treatment covariance with 1999 data the adjusted

results were used In other cases the unadjusted analyses were used Individual bryophyte species

were included in the calculations of species-richness at both sites in these analyses

In all analyses in order to satisfy the conditions for ANOVA (normality of residuals and

homogeneity of residual variation) all percentage data were transformed before analysis by

arcsine(radicp) where p is the percentage value expressed as a proportion All results quoted for

percentage data refer to analyses of arcsine-square root transformed data

Mixed modeling

Mixed model analysis (Residual Estimated Maximum Likelihood ndash REML Genstat V

Committee 1997) was used to identify any effect of form rate or frequency of application on

vegetation composition at each site in 2010 not simply attributable to the total (or mean per year)

amount of fertilizer applied over the study period A variable representing this amount was

included as a continuous explanatory variable in each analysis along with other fixed factors

form rate and frequency of application (Block was included as a random factor) Since the total

(or mean) amounts of N P and K applied over the whole period were completely correlated

across treatments at each site it was not feasible to include all three elements as separate terms in

the model Nor was it feasible to simply use a single notional variable for fertilizer amount (eg t

9

FYM ha-1

year-1

or inorganic equivalent) since there was lack of equivalence of N and P supply

(but not K) between individual FYM treatments and their corresponding inorganic treatments For

each dependent variable tested two separate models were therefore developed using either N or

P ha-1

year-1

as the continuous variable In each case the presence of any non-linearity in response

was tested by including a quadratic term (ie N2 or P

2) or where more appropriate by logn-

transformation of the explanatory variable

For each analysis an initial model was constructed that included all five main effects and all

interactions The importance of each term was evaluated initially by a χ2 test on the Wald statistic

(Genstat V Committee 1997) The number and order of terms in the model were varied but with

N or P amount always included until a model was developed in which each term was significant

The model was then refined by testing the contribution of each term to the model by the more

conservative deviance test ie a χ2 test on the difference in deviance between the model

containing the term and a sub-model from which it was dropped (Welham amp Thompson 1997)

Where there was an interaction between form of fertilizer and the quadratic term but no overall

effect of form - implying that the difference between the two forms of fertilizer lay primarily in a

difference in the curvilinearity of response - a refined model was tested with the P2 (or N

2) x

Form term replaced by Form nested within the quadratic term (eg P2Form) This has the effect

of absorbing the overall effect of form of fertilizer within the interaction term and returns the two

terms P2 and P

2 x Form (Galwey 2006)

These modeling approaches were used with total species-richness and PI species-richness as

(separate) response variables and included data for all treatments limed in 2005 but not in 1999

(ie Trs 2-12)

Results

TEMPORAL CHANGES 1999-2010

Changes over time in total species-richness (number per m2) richness and proportional

aggregate cover of positive indicator (PI) species and proportional aggregate cover of

negative indicator (NI) species at the upland and lowland meadows are represented in

Figs 1 and 2 respectively for ten of the fifteen treatments applied Repeated measures

ANOVA statistics for each of the four variables are given in Supporting Information

Tables S4 S6 S8 and S10 respectively for the upland meadow and Tables S12 S14 S16

and S18 respectively for the lowland meadow Corresponding mean values for each

treatment in each year are given in Tables S5 S7 S9 S11 S13 S15 S17 and S19

respectively Changes in individual species abundance contributing to the temporal trends

in aggregated PI and NI species described below are outlined under Supporting

Information

The upland meadow

The overall effects of both treatment and time were highly significant in the repeated

measures ANOVA for total species-richness at the upland meadow (both P=0001) but

there was no treatment x time interaction (P=0647)

After an initial decline between 1999 and 2000 species-richness remained fairly

constant for most treatments until 2003 after which there was a general increase with the

notable exception of the highest rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) (Fig 1a) The latter

treatment declined further between 2005 and 2007 after which it appeared to recover

slightly and averaged over all years this treatment was significantly less species-rich than

all others (Plt001 compared to Tr 14 Plt0001 the remainder) None of the remaining

10

treatments differed significantly from the limed control treatment (Tr2) averaged over all

years However the more species-rich treatments ie nil fertilizer plus lime applied in

both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) low rate annual and medium rate triennial FYM (Tr 3 and 7

respectively) and the inorganic equivalent to the latter (Tr 11) were all more species-rich

averaged over all years (Plt005) than annual FYM at the medium rate under either

liming regime (ie Trs 4 and 14 the former representing a continuation of past

management)

The effect of the high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was largely responsible for

several main effects within the repeated measures ANOVA of treatments within the Form

x Rate x Frequency (FRF) factorial series namely overall effects (averaged over all

years) of rate (mediumgthigh P=0002) and frequency (triennialgtannual P=0001) of

application and a not quite significant effect of form of fertilizer (FYMltinorganic

P=0057) Both the form x rate and the form x frequency interactions were significant

(both Plt005) high rate FYM was significantly less species-rich than all other

combinations averaged over annual and three yearly treatments and all years (Plt0001

compared to medium rate FYM Plt001 compared to both medium and high rate

inorganic fertilizer) and annual FYM was less species-rich than three yearly FYM and

than inorganic fertilizer either annually or triennial (all Plt0001) averaged over the two

application rates and all years The rate x frequency interaction was not significant

(P=0105) but there was a marginally non-significant three-way interaction between

form rate and frequency (P=0070) with a low mean for high rate annual FYM (Tr 5

211 species m-2

) contrasting markedly with all other treatments within the series

particularly with low rate triennial FYM (Tr 6 267 species m-2

)

As with the full treatment ANOVA the overall time factor was highly significant

(Plt0001) but only the effect of application frequency varied significantly with time

(interaction Plt005) Species-richness declined slightly with annual treatments overall

and increased slightly with triennial treatments such that differences between these were

significant in all years from 2005 onwards (Plt001 for 2006-2009 Plt005 in 2005 and

2010)

Both the richness and aggregate cover of PI species (PI) increased generally with time

(Fig 1b and 1c) although in both cases there was a progressive separation between

species The temporal trend was particularly marked for PI although the time factor

was highly significant (Plt0001) in both ANOVAs The overall treatment effect was

marginally non-significant for PI richness (P=0069) with no indication of a time x

treatment interaction (P=0703) whereas for PI there was both a significant treatment

effect (P=0002) and a marginally non-significant treatment x time interaction (P=0075)

Mean PI was significantly lower averaged over all years for annual FYM treatments at

both 12 and 24 t ha-1

(ie Trs 4 14 and 5) compared to several other treatments notably

nil fertilizer treatments limed either in 2005 only (Tr 2 limed control) or in both 1999

and 2005 (Tr 13) (all differences Plt0001 except Tr 2 vs Tr 4 Plt001) and triennial

inorganic treatments (Trs 11 and 12 Plt001 except for Tr 4 vs Tr 11 Plt005) Within

the FRF series ANOVA the increase in PI over time was greater with triennial

treatments compared to annual averaged over fertilizer forms and rates of application

(time x frequency interaction P=0016) with a marked overall difference due to

application frequency averaged over forms rates and all years (P=0005)

11

PI species-richness showed a similar overall effect of application frequency within the

FRF series (triennialgtannual P=0013) and also a significant overall effect of rate of

application (medium rategthigh rate P=0022) The overall effect of form of fertilizer was

marginally non-significant (FYMltinorganic P=0059) and there was no significant

interaction among any of the three factors averaged over all years nor any interaction

with time

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Specie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime in Year 1+ ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime in Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr1)

a Species richness (total)

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

Fig 1 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition an upland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control

The mean number of negative indicator (NI) species per m2 averaged over all treatments

varied significantly over time at the upland meadow (P=0002 data not shown) though

with no consistent trend - it was lowest overall in 2002 (499 per m2) and highest in both

1999 and 2008 (548 per m2) The treatment x time interaction was not significant

(P=0469) but the overall treatment effect was highly significant (Plt0001) mean

number of NI species per m2 was higher than the limed control (Tr 1 453 per m

2) with

all fertilizer treatments except Treatments 11 (triennial inorganic fertilizer at the lower

rate) and 13 (nil fertilizer limed in both 1999 and 2005) (Plt0001 for all except Trs 5

and 6 for which Plt001) The highest mean NI m-2

value was for high rate inorganic

12

fertilizer (Tr 10 565 per m2) which differed significantly (Plt005) from its FYM

counterpart Treatment 5 There was however no consistent difference between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts and no overall effect of form of fertilizer

within the FRF series (P=0745) There was a significant form x rate interaction within

this ANOVA (P=0032) but only the difference between the high rate and lower rate

inorganic means was significant (high rategtlower rate Plt001)

The aggregate contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator species (NI)

showed a very marked divergence between treatments over time (Fig 1d) with NI

either changing little or declining under most treatments again with the notable exception

of high rate annual FYM (Tr 5) under which NI increased over time Time treatment

and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001) The

predominant temporal trend was downward (from 25 of live cover in 1999 to 14 in

2010 averaged over all treatments) but NI for Treatment 5 had significantly increased

compared to 1999 in 2002 2003 (Plt005) 2005 (Plt0001) 2008 (Plt0001) and 2009

(Plt001) but not in 2010 (Fig 1d) The most marked declines in NI occurred on the

limed control (Tr 2) nil fertilizer plus lime in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) and the lower

rate triennial inorganic fertilizer treatments (Tr 11) differences compared to both 1999

and 2002 were highly significant (Plt0001) in most subsequent years for these

treatments A smaller decline also occurred after 2002 on the treatment equivalent to past

inputs (ie12 t ha-1

year-1

annual FYM Tr 4) In most years this treatment differed little

from the equivalent FYM treatment limed in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 14)

These trends were reflected in highly significant overall effects on NI within the FRF

series of form (FYMgtinorganic) rate (mediumlthigh) and frequency (triennialltannual)

(all effects Plt0001) Time x rate and time x frequency interactions were both significant

(P=0019 and Plt0001 respectively) with a marginally non-significant rate x frequency

interaction averaged over all years (P=0054) NI declined over time under both

application rates averaged over forms and frequencies of application but the decline was

slower with high rate treatments compared to lower rate Difference between rates were

significant in all years from 2002 onwards (Plt005 in 2002 2006 and 2007 Plt0001 in

other years) Overall differences due to frequency of application were even more marked

Under annual application NI declined initially from 2003-2006 compared to 1999 but

subsequently recovered and did not differ from 1999 levels from 2007 onwards whilst

under triennial application differences were highly significant (Plt0001) compared to

1999 from 2003 onwards with significant differences between years during this same

period (Plt005 in 2003 and 2006 Plt0001 in remaining years)

Repeated-measures ANOVAs within the LFF treatment series at the upland meadow

showed no overall effect of liming regime on temporal trends for any of the above

variables nor any interaction of lime with either time or FYM frequency - note that FYM

was applied at the intermediate rate (12 t ha-1

) in all FYM treatments within this series

The overall effect of FYM frequency was significant for both PI (P=0003) and the

number of NI species m-2

(P=0001) PI was highest with nil FYM and lowest with

annual FYM with triennial intermediate and differing significantly (Plt005) from the

other two means NI species m-2

did not differ between triennial and annual application

within the LFF series but both were significantly higher than nil FYM (Plt001 for

triennial Plt0001 for annual application) There was also a significant time x FYM

frequency interaction for NI within this series (P=0001) reflecting a more rapid

13

decline with nil FYM than with triennial FYM and no significant overall trend with

annual FYM when averaged over both lime treatments

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Spe

cie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime Year 1 + ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr 1)

a Species richness (total)

2

3

4

5

6

7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

Fig 2 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition at a lowland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control treatment and those that had received lime in year 1

Treatments 1 and 2 were identical (nil input) until 2005

The lowland meadow

Both time and treatment were significant within the ANOVA for total species-richness at

the lowland meadow (Plt0001 and P=0009 respectively and in contrast to the upland

site the treatment x time interaction was significant (P=0012) Averaged over all years

high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was significantly less species-rich than all others

except Treatment 14 (annual FYM at 12 t ha-1

limed in 1999) having declined

progressively between 1999 and 2009 (Fig 2a) with most differences significant at

Plt001 Treatment 14 did not differ significantly overall compared to the corresponding

FYM treatment not limed until 2005 (Tr 4) although these two treatments showed

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 6: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

6

the inorganic fertilizer P applied each year corresponded to 60 of the total P in FYM between

1999 and 2006 and 80 from 2007-2010

Inorganic N P and K were applied as ammonium nitrate triple super-phosphate and muriate of

potash respectively to the relevant treatments The FYM treatments were designed to encompass

the range of inputs traditionally applied to species-rich hay meadows upon which current agri-

environment guidelines are based (Simpson and Jefferson 1996 Crofts and Jefferson 1999)

Lime was applied to treatments 13 14 and 15 only at each site in March-April 1999 and to most

treatments in 2005 (Table 2) The latter included the three previously limed treatments at the

upland meadow but not at the lowland one since soil pH levels had not fallen significantly by

2005 on these plots at the latter site Based on assessments of soil texture and soil pH tests

conducted in February-March the amounts of lime were calculated to be sufficient to raise the

soil pH of the experimental plots to 60 (Anon 2010)

At each site one plot per replicate block received no fertilizer or lime (untreated control)

between 1999 and 2005 whilst another plot per replicate was designated as a continuation of past

fertilizer inputs At the lowland meadow the latter was identical to the untreated control

treatment but at the upland meadow it was identical to Treatment 4 (12 t ha-1

FYM annually) In

2005 a decision was made to treat occasional liming as lsquobackgroundrsquo management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites to be triggered for each treatment in future years once mean pH

for that treatment had declined to 55 whilst retaining both an untreated control (ie nil fertilizer

nil lime ndash Treatment 1) and a nil fertilizer (limed in 2005) control treatment (Treatment 2) at each

site The rationale behind this decision is addressed in the Discussion section At the lowland

meadow one of the two hitherto untreated control plots per replicate (Treatment 2) was therefore

limed in 2005 along with other treatments Only one nil input plot per replicate was available at

the upland meadow but since the site had a history of liming the existing nil input plots were

limed in 2005 (Treatment 2) and new untreated control plots (Treatment 1) were established

adjacent to each replicate block with the end at which each was located chosen randomly for

each block

The experimental plots were cut for hay after 1 July each year at the upland site and after 15

July at the lowland site the actual cutting date being dependent on weather conditions The hay

aftermath growth was grazed each year with experimental plots being grazed with the remainder

of the field At the upland meadow mature sheep were used normally commencing in September-

October continuing until March or late April The lowland meadow was grazed by beef store

cattle from mid Octoberearly November to late February

Botanical assessments were carried out during May each year except in 2001 at the upland

meadow due to FMD restrictions The percentage cover of each species present was estimated

visually in three 1m2 quadrats positioned at random within each plot in 1999 and then fixed for

the project duration

Soils were sampled in March 1999 2002 2004 2007 and 2010 by taking five 35 mm diameter x

75mm deep soil cores at random from within each treatment plot but outside the fixed positions

of the three 1m2 botanical survey quadrats The five samples per plot were combined dried at

30oC and then ground prior to analysis for organic carbon (C) total nitrogen (N) Olsen

extractable P exchangeable potassium (K) magnesium (Mg) calcium (Ca) sodium (Na) and pH

(in H2O) using standard laboratory methods (Allen 1974 MAFF 1986)

Soils were further sampled in June 1999 2002 2004 2007 and 2010 for soil microbial

assessment by taking five 35 mm diameter x 100 mm deep cores which were subsequently bulked

for each plot sieved (5 mm) and stored at 4oC prior to analysis Microbial community structure

was assessed using phospholipid fatty acid analysis (PLFA) as described by Bardgett et al

(1996) The fatty acids i150 a150 150 i160 170 i170 cy170 cis181ω7 and cy190 were

chosen to represent bacterial PLFAs (Federle 1986 Frostegaringrd Tunlid amp Baringaringth 1993) and

182ω6 was used as an indicator of fungal biomass (Federle 1986) The ratio of 182ω6bacterial

7

PLFAs was taken to represent the ratio of fungal-to-bacterial biomass in soil (Bardgett Hobbs amp

Frostegaringrd 1996 Frostegaringrd amp Baringaringth 1996)

DERIVED BOTANICAL VARIABLES

Estimates of cover for individual species were converted to a percentage of the total live

vegetation cover present in each quadrat in order to minimize the effects of year-to-year variation

and variation between treatments in vegetation density and total cover Several composite

variables were calculated to characterize the vegetation and these were then averaged across the

three quadrats in each plot to give plot mean values for each variable Plot means were then used

as the basic units for subsequent analyses of treatment effects

Key variables

Five key variables were used to investigate the effects of treatment and time on botanical

composition total species-richness (the total number of vascular plant species per m2) the

number per m2 of MG3 and MG5 positive indicator species (the upland and lowland meadows

respectively) the aggregate cover of these species as a percentage of total vegetation cover the

number per m2 of negative indicator species and the aggregate cover of negative indicator

species as a percentage of total vegetation cover Positive mesotrophic indicator species were

identified from lists produced by Robertson and Jefferson (2000) for use in monitoring the

condition of grassland Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) in MG3 (Anthoxanthum

odoratum-Geranium sylvaticum grassland) and MG5 (Cynosurus cristatus-Centaurea nigra

grassland) communities of the NVC (Rodwell 1992) A single list of negative indicator species

was compiled from the generic negative indicators for MG3 and MG5 communities (Robertson amp

Jefferson 2000) augmented by species shown in previous work (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996) to be favoured by nutrient addition and for which an increase in abundance

would indicate a negative effect on plant community quality Positive and negative indicator

species are listed in Supporting Information Table S3

Additional variables

Among other derived variables was the weighted Ellenberg N score (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham

et al 2008) referred to hereafter as the fertility score The Ellenberg N index represents the

degree of association with soil fertility (not specifically soil N) of a particular species (Ellenberg

1988 Hill et al 1999) Fertility scores were calculated for each quadrat as the average N index

of the component species weighted according to the proportional contribution of each species to

total vegetation cover Plot mean fertility scores were highly correlated at both sites with the

aggregate cover of negative indicator species (NI) (Pearson r=0845 and r=0927 at the upland

and lowland sites respectively in 2010 both Plt0001) The latter variable was preferred to

fertility scores for statistical analyses in this paper because it proved more responsive to fertilizer

treatments although fertility scores are referred to in the Discussion section in relation to results

from elsewhere

DATA ANALYSIS

ANOVAs for treatment effects

For each of the key variables botanical data for all years 1999-2010 except 2001 at the upland

meadow and for all treatments except Treatment 1 at the same meadow were analyzed by

repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA - Genstat V Committee 1997) with Year as the

repeated measures factor Separate ANOVAs were carried out for each variable within each site

using three separate ANOVA models in each case In each model variation between replicate

8

blocks was accounted for by treating replicate as a blocking factor The first model included all

the treatments except Treatment 1 at the upland meadow whilst the other two models used

balanced factorial subsets (series) of treatments (see Table 2) the Form x Rate x Frequency

(FRF) series and the Lime x FYM frequency (LFF) series

The FRF series tested the effects of form of fertilizer (ie FYM or inorganic) the rate at which

fertilizers were applied (12 or 24 t FYM ha-1

and inorganic treatments corresponding to these)

the frequency at which treatments were applied (ie annual or triennially) and all two- and three-

way interactions between these factors

The LFF series tested the effects of liming regime ie lime in 1999 (and 2005 at the upland site)

versus lime in 2005 only the frequency of FYM application (ie nil annual or triennially) and the

Lime x FYM frequency interaction All FYM treatments within this series were applied at 12 t ha-

1 At both sites the LFF series consisted of Treatments 2 4 7 13 14 and 15 (see Table 2) The

liming comparison therefore differed slightly between the two sites since liming was repeated in

2005 on plots previously limed in 1999 at the upland meadow but not repeated at the lowland

one

In both the LFF and the FRF models for each variable the first stratum of the ANOVA

consisted of the effects of all factors and interactions averaged over time with the same factors

and interactions repeated in the second stratum with time as an additional factor

In all repeated measures ANOVAs to account for the repeated measures aspect all degrees of

freedom in the Year x Treatment stratum were adjusted to account for departure from

homogeneity of the population covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the

Greenhouse-Geisser method (Genstat V Committee 1997)

In most years including 2010 all species were recorded individually but at both sites

bryophytes were recorded only as a single group in some years This had only a small influence

on the data since there were seldom more than two bryophyte species present in a quadrat and

more often less Nevertheless for consistency between years bryophytes were treated as a single

group in all years when calculating total species-richness for data for repeated measures

ANOVAs

In addition to the above analyses 2010 data for the key variables were tested alone for treatment

effects by ANOVA and by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) the latter using 1999 data as the

covariate (Genstat 5 Committee 1997) All three models as described above were tested The

ANCOVAs for the upland meadow excluded Treatment 1 (untreated control plots established in

2005) Where an ANCOVA showed significant treatment covariance with 1999 data the adjusted

results were used In other cases the unadjusted analyses were used Individual bryophyte species

were included in the calculations of species-richness at both sites in these analyses

In all analyses in order to satisfy the conditions for ANOVA (normality of residuals and

homogeneity of residual variation) all percentage data were transformed before analysis by

arcsine(radicp) where p is the percentage value expressed as a proportion All results quoted for

percentage data refer to analyses of arcsine-square root transformed data

Mixed modeling

Mixed model analysis (Residual Estimated Maximum Likelihood ndash REML Genstat V

Committee 1997) was used to identify any effect of form rate or frequency of application on

vegetation composition at each site in 2010 not simply attributable to the total (or mean per year)

amount of fertilizer applied over the study period A variable representing this amount was

included as a continuous explanatory variable in each analysis along with other fixed factors

form rate and frequency of application (Block was included as a random factor) Since the total

(or mean) amounts of N P and K applied over the whole period were completely correlated

across treatments at each site it was not feasible to include all three elements as separate terms in

the model Nor was it feasible to simply use a single notional variable for fertilizer amount (eg t

9

FYM ha-1

year-1

or inorganic equivalent) since there was lack of equivalence of N and P supply

(but not K) between individual FYM treatments and their corresponding inorganic treatments For

each dependent variable tested two separate models were therefore developed using either N or

P ha-1

year-1

as the continuous variable In each case the presence of any non-linearity in response

was tested by including a quadratic term (ie N2 or P

2) or where more appropriate by logn-

transformation of the explanatory variable

For each analysis an initial model was constructed that included all five main effects and all

interactions The importance of each term was evaluated initially by a χ2 test on the Wald statistic

(Genstat V Committee 1997) The number and order of terms in the model were varied but with

N or P amount always included until a model was developed in which each term was significant

The model was then refined by testing the contribution of each term to the model by the more

conservative deviance test ie a χ2 test on the difference in deviance between the model

containing the term and a sub-model from which it was dropped (Welham amp Thompson 1997)

Where there was an interaction between form of fertilizer and the quadratic term but no overall

effect of form - implying that the difference between the two forms of fertilizer lay primarily in a

difference in the curvilinearity of response - a refined model was tested with the P2 (or N

2) x

Form term replaced by Form nested within the quadratic term (eg P2Form) This has the effect

of absorbing the overall effect of form of fertilizer within the interaction term and returns the two

terms P2 and P

2 x Form (Galwey 2006)

These modeling approaches were used with total species-richness and PI species-richness as

(separate) response variables and included data for all treatments limed in 2005 but not in 1999

(ie Trs 2-12)

Results

TEMPORAL CHANGES 1999-2010

Changes over time in total species-richness (number per m2) richness and proportional

aggregate cover of positive indicator (PI) species and proportional aggregate cover of

negative indicator (NI) species at the upland and lowland meadows are represented in

Figs 1 and 2 respectively for ten of the fifteen treatments applied Repeated measures

ANOVA statistics for each of the four variables are given in Supporting Information

Tables S4 S6 S8 and S10 respectively for the upland meadow and Tables S12 S14 S16

and S18 respectively for the lowland meadow Corresponding mean values for each

treatment in each year are given in Tables S5 S7 S9 S11 S13 S15 S17 and S19

respectively Changes in individual species abundance contributing to the temporal trends

in aggregated PI and NI species described below are outlined under Supporting

Information

The upland meadow

The overall effects of both treatment and time were highly significant in the repeated

measures ANOVA for total species-richness at the upland meadow (both P=0001) but

there was no treatment x time interaction (P=0647)

After an initial decline between 1999 and 2000 species-richness remained fairly

constant for most treatments until 2003 after which there was a general increase with the

notable exception of the highest rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) (Fig 1a) The latter

treatment declined further between 2005 and 2007 after which it appeared to recover

slightly and averaged over all years this treatment was significantly less species-rich than

all others (Plt001 compared to Tr 14 Plt0001 the remainder) None of the remaining

10

treatments differed significantly from the limed control treatment (Tr2) averaged over all

years However the more species-rich treatments ie nil fertilizer plus lime applied in

both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) low rate annual and medium rate triennial FYM (Tr 3 and 7

respectively) and the inorganic equivalent to the latter (Tr 11) were all more species-rich

averaged over all years (Plt005) than annual FYM at the medium rate under either

liming regime (ie Trs 4 and 14 the former representing a continuation of past

management)

The effect of the high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was largely responsible for

several main effects within the repeated measures ANOVA of treatments within the Form

x Rate x Frequency (FRF) factorial series namely overall effects (averaged over all

years) of rate (mediumgthigh P=0002) and frequency (triennialgtannual P=0001) of

application and a not quite significant effect of form of fertilizer (FYMltinorganic

P=0057) Both the form x rate and the form x frequency interactions were significant

(both Plt005) high rate FYM was significantly less species-rich than all other

combinations averaged over annual and three yearly treatments and all years (Plt0001

compared to medium rate FYM Plt001 compared to both medium and high rate

inorganic fertilizer) and annual FYM was less species-rich than three yearly FYM and

than inorganic fertilizer either annually or triennial (all Plt0001) averaged over the two

application rates and all years The rate x frequency interaction was not significant

(P=0105) but there was a marginally non-significant three-way interaction between

form rate and frequency (P=0070) with a low mean for high rate annual FYM (Tr 5

211 species m-2

) contrasting markedly with all other treatments within the series

particularly with low rate triennial FYM (Tr 6 267 species m-2

)

As with the full treatment ANOVA the overall time factor was highly significant

(Plt0001) but only the effect of application frequency varied significantly with time

(interaction Plt005) Species-richness declined slightly with annual treatments overall

and increased slightly with triennial treatments such that differences between these were

significant in all years from 2005 onwards (Plt001 for 2006-2009 Plt005 in 2005 and

2010)

Both the richness and aggregate cover of PI species (PI) increased generally with time

(Fig 1b and 1c) although in both cases there was a progressive separation between

species The temporal trend was particularly marked for PI although the time factor

was highly significant (Plt0001) in both ANOVAs The overall treatment effect was

marginally non-significant for PI richness (P=0069) with no indication of a time x

treatment interaction (P=0703) whereas for PI there was both a significant treatment

effect (P=0002) and a marginally non-significant treatment x time interaction (P=0075)

Mean PI was significantly lower averaged over all years for annual FYM treatments at

both 12 and 24 t ha-1

(ie Trs 4 14 and 5) compared to several other treatments notably

nil fertilizer treatments limed either in 2005 only (Tr 2 limed control) or in both 1999

and 2005 (Tr 13) (all differences Plt0001 except Tr 2 vs Tr 4 Plt001) and triennial

inorganic treatments (Trs 11 and 12 Plt001 except for Tr 4 vs Tr 11 Plt005) Within

the FRF series ANOVA the increase in PI over time was greater with triennial

treatments compared to annual averaged over fertilizer forms and rates of application

(time x frequency interaction P=0016) with a marked overall difference due to

application frequency averaged over forms rates and all years (P=0005)

11

PI species-richness showed a similar overall effect of application frequency within the

FRF series (triennialgtannual P=0013) and also a significant overall effect of rate of

application (medium rategthigh rate P=0022) The overall effect of form of fertilizer was

marginally non-significant (FYMltinorganic P=0059) and there was no significant

interaction among any of the three factors averaged over all years nor any interaction

with time

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Specie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime in Year 1+ ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime in Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr1)

a Species richness (total)

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

Fig 1 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition an upland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control

The mean number of negative indicator (NI) species per m2 averaged over all treatments

varied significantly over time at the upland meadow (P=0002 data not shown) though

with no consistent trend - it was lowest overall in 2002 (499 per m2) and highest in both

1999 and 2008 (548 per m2) The treatment x time interaction was not significant

(P=0469) but the overall treatment effect was highly significant (Plt0001) mean

number of NI species per m2 was higher than the limed control (Tr 1 453 per m

2) with

all fertilizer treatments except Treatments 11 (triennial inorganic fertilizer at the lower

rate) and 13 (nil fertilizer limed in both 1999 and 2005) (Plt0001 for all except Trs 5

and 6 for which Plt001) The highest mean NI m-2

value was for high rate inorganic

12

fertilizer (Tr 10 565 per m2) which differed significantly (Plt005) from its FYM

counterpart Treatment 5 There was however no consistent difference between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts and no overall effect of form of fertilizer

within the FRF series (P=0745) There was a significant form x rate interaction within

this ANOVA (P=0032) but only the difference between the high rate and lower rate

inorganic means was significant (high rategtlower rate Plt001)

The aggregate contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator species (NI)

showed a very marked divergence between treatments over time (Fig 1d) with NI

either changing little or declining under most treatments again with the notable exception

of high rate annual FYM (Tr 5) under which NI increased over time Time treatment

and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001) The

predominant temporal trend was downward (from 25 of live cover in 1999 to 14 in

2010 averaged over all treatments) but NI for Treatment 5 had significantly increased

compared to 1999 in 2002 2003 (Plt005) 2005 (Plt0001) 2008 (Plt0001) and 2009

(Plt001) but not in 2010 (Fig 1d) The most marked declines in NI occurred on the

limed control (Tr 2) nil fertilizer plus lime in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) and the lower

rate triennial inorganic fertilizer treatments (Tr 11) differences compared to both 1999

and 2002 were highly significant (Plt0001) in most subsequent years for these

treatments A smaller decline also occurred after 2002 on the treatment equivalent to past

inputs (ie12 t ha-1

year-1

annual FYM Tr 4) In most years this treatment differed little

from the equivalent FYM treatment limed in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 14)

These trends were reflected in highly significant overall effects on NI within the FRF

series of form (FYMgtinorganic) rate (mediumlthigh) and frequency (triennialltannual)

(all effects Plt0001) Time x rate and time x frequency interactions were both significant

(P=0019 and Plt0001 respectively) with a marginally non-significant rate x frequency

interaction averaged over all years (P=0054) NI declined over time under both

application rates averaged over forms and frequencies of application but the decline was

slower with high rate treatments compared to lower rate Difference between rates were

significant in all years from 2002 onwards (Plt005 in 2002 2006 and 2007 Plt0001 in

other years) Overall differences due to frequency of application were even more marked

Under annual application NI declined initially from 2003-2006 compared to 1999 but

subsequently recovered and did not differ from 1999 levels from 2007 onwards whilst

under triennial application differences were highly significant (Plt0001) compared to

1999 from 2003 onwards with significant differences between years during this same

period (Plt005 in 2003 and 2006 Plt0001 in remaining years)

Repeated-measures ANOVAs within the LFF treatment series at the upland meadow

showed no overall effect of liming regime on temporal trends for any of the above

variables nor any interaction of lime with either time or FYM frequency - note that FYM

was applied at the intermediate rate (12 t ha-1

) in all FYM treatments within this series

The overall effect of FYM frequency was significant for both PI (P=0003) and the

number of NI species m-2

(P=0001) PI was highest with nil FYM and lowest with

annual FYM with triennial intermediate and differing significantly (Plt005) from the

other two means NI species m-2

did not differ between triennial and annual application

within the LFF series but both were significantly higher than nil FYM (Plt001 for

triennial Plt0001 for annual application) There was also a significant time x FYM

frequency interaction for NI within this series (P=0001) reflecting a more rapid

13

decline with nil FYM than with triennial FYM and no significant overall trend with

annual FYM when averaged over both lime treatments

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Spe

cie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime Year 1 + ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr 1)

a Species richness (total)

2

3

4

5

6

7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

Fig 2 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition at a lowland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control treatment and those that had received lime in year 1

Treatments 1 and 2 were identical (nil input) until 2005

The lowland meadow

Both time and treatment were significant within the ANOVA for total species-richness at

the lowland meadow (Plt0001 and P=0009 respectively and in contrast to the upland

site the treatment x time interaction was significant (P=0012) Averaged over all years

high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was significantly less species-rich than all others

except Treatment 14 (annual FYM at 12 t ha-1

limed in 1999) having declined

progressively between 1999 and 2009 (Fig 2a) with most differences significant at

Plt001 Treatment 14 did not differ significantly overall compared to the corresponding

FYM treatment not limed until 2005 (Tr 4) although these two treatments showed

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 7: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

7

PLFAs was taken to represent the ratio of fungal-to-bacterial biomass in soil (Bardgett Hobbs amp

Frostegaringrd 1996 Frostegaringrd amp Baringaringth 1996)

DERIVED BOTANICAL VARIABLES

Estimates of cover for individual species were converted to a percentage of the total live

vegetation cover present in each quadrat in order to minimize the effects of year-to-year variation

and variation between treatments in vegetation density and total cover Several composite

variables were calculated to characterize the vegetation and these were then averaged across the

three quadrats in each plot to give plot mean values for each variable Plot means were then used

as the basic units for subsequent analyses of treatment effects

Key variables

Five key variables were used to investigate the effects of treatment and time on botanical

composition total species-richness (the total number of vascular plant species per m2) the

number per m2 of MG3 and MG5 positive indicator species (the upland and lowland meadows

respectively) the aggregate cover of these species as a percentage of total vegetation cover the

number per m2 of negative indicator species and the aggregate cover of negative indicator

species as a percentage of total vegetation cover Positive mesotrophic indicator species were

identified from lists produced by Robertson and Jefferson (2000) for use in monitoring the

condition of grassland Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) in MG3 (Anthoxanthum

odoratum-Geranium sylvaticum grassland) and MG5 (Cynosurus cristatus-Centaurea nigra

grassland) communities of the NVC (Rodwell 1992) A single list of negative indicator species

was compiled from the generic negative indicators for MG3 and MG5 communities (Robertson amp

Jefferson 2000) augmented by species shown in previous work (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996) to be favoured by nutrient addition and for which an increase in abundance

would indicate a negative effect on plant community quality Positive and negative indicator

species are listed in Supporting Information Table S3

Additional variables

Among other derived variables was the weighted Ellenberg N score (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham

et al 2008) referred to hereafter as the fertility score The Ellenberg N index represents the

degree of association with soil fertility (not specifically soil N) of a particular species (Ellenberg

1988 Hill et al 1999) Fertility scores were calculated for each quadrat as the average N index

of the component species weighted according to the proportional contribution of each species to

total vegetation cover Plot mean fertility scores were highly correlated at both sites with the

aggregate cover of negative indicator species (NI) (Pearson r=0845 and r=0927 at the upland

and lowland sites respectively in 2010 both Plt0001) The latter variable was preferred to

fertility scores for statistical analyses in this paper because it proved more responsive to fertilizer

treatments although fertility scores are referred to in the Discussion section in relation to results

from elsewhere

DATA ANALYSIS

ANOVAs for treatment effects

For each of the key variables botanical data for all years 1999-2010 except 2001 at the upland

meadow and for all treatments except Treatment 1 at the same meadow were analyzed by

repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA - Genstat V Committee 1997) with Year as the

repeated measures factor Separate ANOVAs were carried out for each variable within each site

using three separate ANOVA models in each case In each model variation between replicate

8

blocks was accounted for by treating replicate as a blocking factor The first model included all

the treatments except Treatment 1 at the upland meadow whilst the other two models used

balanced factorial subsets (series) of treatments (see Table 2) the Form x Rate x Frequency

(FRF) series and the Lime x FYM frequency (LFF) series

The FRF series tested the effects of form of fertilizer (ie FYM or inorganic) the rate at which

fertilizers were applied (12 or 24 t FYM ha-1

and inorganic treatments corresponding to these)

the frequency at which treatments were applied (ie annual or triennially) and all two- and three-

way interactions between these factors

The LFF series tested the effects of liming regime ie lime in 1999 (and 2005 at the upland site)

versus lime in 2005 only the frequency of FYM application (ie nil annual or triennially) and the

Lime x FYM frequency interaction All FYM treatments within this series were applied at 12 t ha-

1 At both sites the LFF series consisted of Treatments 2 4 7 13 14 and 15 (see Table 2) The

liming comparison therefore differed slightly between the two sites since liming was repeated in

2005 on plots previously limed in 1999 at the upland meadow but not repeated at the lowland

one

In both the LFF and the FRF models for each variable the first stratum of the ANOVA

consisted of the effects of all factors and interactions averaged over time with the same factors

and interactions repeated in the second stratum with time as an additional factor

In all repeated measures ANOVAs to account for the repeated measures aspect all degrees of

freedom in the Year x Treatment stratum were adjusted to account for departure from

homogeneity of the population covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the

Greenhouse-Geisser method (Genstat V Committee 1997)

In most years including 2010 all species were recorded individually but at both sites

bryophytes were recorded only as a single group in some years This had only a small influence

on the data since there were seldom more than two bryophyte species present in a quadrat and

more often less Nevertheless for consistency between years bryophytes were treated as a single

group in all years when calculating total species-richness for data for repeated measures

ANOVAs

In addition to the above analyses 2010 data for the key variables were tested alone for treatment

effects by ANOVA and by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) the latter using 1999 data as the

covariate (Genstat 5 Committee 1997) All three models as described above were tested The

ANCOVAs for the upland meadow excluded Treatment 1 (untreated control plots established in

2005) Where an ANCOVA showed significant treatment covariance with 1999 data the adjusted

results were used In other cases the unadjusted analyses were used Individual bryophyte species

were included in the calculations of species-richness at both sites in these analyses

In all analyses in order to satisfy the conditions for ANOVA (normality of residuals and

homogeneity of residual variation) all percentage data were transformed before analysis by

arcsine(radicp) where p is the percentage value expressed as a proportion All results quoted for

percentage data refer to analyses of arcsine-square root transformed data

Mixed modeling

Mixed model analysis (Residual Estimated Maximum Likelihood ndash REML Genstat V

Committee 1997) was used to identify any effect of form rate or frequency of application on

vegetation composition at each site in 2010 not simply attributable to the total (or mean per year)

amount of fertilizer applied over the study period A variable representing this amount was

included as a continuous explanatory variable in each analysis along with other fixed factors

form rate and frequency of application (Block was included as a random factor) Since the total

(or mean) amounts of N P and K applied over the whole period were completely correlated

across treatments at each site it was not feasible to include all three elements as separate terms in

the model Nor was it feasible to simply use a single notional variable for fertilizer amount (eg t

9

FYM ha-1

year-1

or inorganic equivalent) since there was lack of equivalence of N and P supply

(but not K) between individual FYM treatments and their corresponding inorganic treatments For

each dependent variable tested two separate models were therefore developed using either N or

P ha-1

year-1

as the continuous variable In each case the presence of any non-linearity in response

was tested by including a quadratic term (ie N2 or P

2) or where more appropriate by logn-

transformation of the explanatory variable

For each analysis an initial model was constructed that included all five main effects and all

interactions The importance of each term was evaluated initially by a χ2 test on the Wald statistic

(Genstat V Committee 1997) The number and order of terms in the model were varied but with

N or P amount always included until a model was developed in which each term was significant

The model was then refined by testing the contribution of each term to the model by the more

conservative deviance test ie a χ2 test on the difference in deviance between the model

containing the term and a sub-model from which it was dropped (Welham amp Thompson 1997)

Where there was an interaction between form of fertilizer and the quadratic term but no overall

effect of form - implying that the difference between the two forms of fertilizer lay primarily in a

difference in the curvilinearity of response - a refined model was tested with the P2 (or N

2) x

Form term replaced by Form nested within the quadratic term (eg P2Form) This has the effect

of absorbing the overall effect of form of fertilizer within the interaction term and returns the two

terms P2 and P

2 x Form (Galwey 2006)

These modeling approaches were used with total species-richness and PI species-richness as

(separate) response variables and included data for all treatments limed in 2005 but not in 1999

(ie Trs 2-12)

Results

TEMPORAL CHANGES 1999-2010

Changes over time in total species-richness (number per m2) richness and proportional

aggregate cover of positive indicator (PI) species and proportional aggregate cover of

negative indicator (NI) species at the upland and lowland meadows are represented in

Figs 1 and 2 respectively for ten of the fifteen treatments applied Repeated measures

ANOVA statistics for each of the four variables are given in Supporting Information

Tables S4 S6 S8 and S10 respectively for the upland meadow and Tables S12 S14 S16

and S18 respectively for the lowland meadow Corresponding mean values for each

treatment in each year are given in Tables S5 S7 S9 S11 S13 S15 S17 and S19

respectively Changes in individual species abundance contributing to the temporal trends

in aggregated PI and NI species described below are outlined under Supporting

Information

The upland meadow

The overall effects of both treatment and time were highly significant in the repeated

measures ANOVA for total species-richness at the upland meadow (both P=0001) but

there was no treatment x time interaction (P=0647)

After an initial decline between 1999 and 2000 species-richness remained fairly

constant for most treatments until 2003 after which there was a general increase with the

notable exception of the highest rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) (Fig 1a) The latter

treatment declined further between 2005 and 2007 after which it appeared to recover

slightly and averaged over all years this treatment was significantly less species-rich than

all others (Plt001 compared to Tr 14 Plt0001 the remainder) None of the remaining

10

treatments differed significantly from the limed control treatment (Tr2) averaged over all

years However the more species-rich treatments ie nil fertilizer plus lime applied in

both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) low rate annual and medium rate triennial FYM (Tr 3 and 7

respectively) and the inorganic equivalent to the latter (Tr 11) were all more species-rich

averaged over all years (Plt005) than annual FYM at the medium rate under either

liming regime (ie Trs 4 and 14 the former representing a continuation of past

management)

The effect of the high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was largely responsible for

several main effects within the repeated measures ANOVA of treatments within the Form

x Rate x Frequency (FRF) factorial series namely overall effects (averaged over all

years) of rate (mediumgthigh P=0002) and frequency (triennialgtannual P=0001) of

application and a not quite significant effect of form of fertilizer (FYMltinorganic

P=0057) Both the form x rate and the form x frequency interactions were significant

(both Plt005) high rate FYM was significantly less species-rich than all other

combinations averaged over annual and three yearly treatments and all years (Plt0001

compared to medium rate FYM Plt001 compared to both medium and high rate

inorganic fertilizer) and annual FYM was less species-rich than three yearly FYM and

than inorganic fertilizer either annually or triennial (all Plt0001) averaged over the two

application rates and all years The rate x frequency interaction was not significant

(P=0105) but there was a marginally non-significant three-way interaction between

form rate and frequency (P=0070) with a low mean for high rate annual FYM (Tr 5

211 species m-2

) contrasting markedly with all other treatments within the series

particularly with low rate triennial FYM (Tr 6 267 species m-2

)

As with the full treatment ANOVA the overall time factor was highly significant

(Plt0001) but only the effect of application frequency varied significantly with time

(interaction Plt005) Species-richness declined slightly with annual treatments overall

and increased slightly with triennial treatments such that differences between these were

significant in all years from 2005 onwards (Plt001 for 2006-2009 Plt005 in 2005 and

2010)

Both the richness and aggregate cover of PI species (PI) increased generally with time

(Fig 1b and 1c) although in both cases there was a progressive separation between

species The temporal trend was particularly marked for PI although the time factor

was highly significant (Plt0001) in both ANOVAs The overall treatment effect was

marginally non-significant for PI richness (P=0069) with no indication of a time x

treatment interaction (P=0703) whereas for PI there was both a significant treatment

effect (P=0002) and a marginally non-significant treatment x time interaction (P=0075)

Mean PI was significantly lower averaged over all years for annual FYM treatments at

both 12 and 24 t ha-1

(ie Trs 4 14 and 5) compared to several other treatments notably

nil fertilizer treatments limed either in 2005 only (Tr 2 limed control) or in both 1999

and 2005 (Tr 13) (all differences Plt0001 except Tr 2 vs Tr 4 Plt001) and triennial

inorganic treatments (Trs 11 and 12 Plt001 except for Tr 4 vs Tr 11 Plt005) Within

the FRF series ANOVA the increase in PI over time was greater with triennial

treatments compared to annual averaged over fertilizer forms and rates of application

(time x frequency interaction P=0016) with a marked overall difference due to

application frequency averaged over forms rates and all years (P=0005)

11

PI species-richness showed a similar overall effect of application frequency within the

FRF series (triennialgtannual P=0013) and also a significant overall effect of rate of

application (medium rategthigh rate P=0022) The overall effect of form of fertilizer was

marginally non-significant (FYMltinorganic P=0059) and there was no significant

interaction among any of the three factors averaged over all years nor any interaction

with time

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Specie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime in Year 1+ ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime in Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr1)

a Species richness (total)

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

Fig 1 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition an upland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control

The mean number of negative indicator (NI) species per m2 averaged over all treatments

varied significantly over time at the upland meadow (P=0002 data not shown) though

with no consistent trend - it was lowest overall in 2002 (499 per m2) and highest in both

1999 and 2008 (548 per m2) The treatment x time interaction was not significant

(P=0469) but the overall treatment effect was highly significant (Plt0001) mean

number of NI species per m2 was higher than the limed control (Tr 1 453 per m

2) with

all fertilizer treatments except Treatments 11 (triennial inorganic fertilizer at the lower

rate) and 13 (nil fertilizer limed in both 1999 and 2005) (Plt0001 for all except Trs 5

and 6 for which Plt001) The highest mean NI m-2

value was for high rate inorganic

12

fertilizer (Tr 10 565 per m2) which differed significantly (Plt005) from its FYM

counterpart Treatment 5 There was however no consistent difference between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts and no overall effect of form of fertilizer

within the FRF series (P=0745) There was a significant form x rate interaction within

this ANOVA (P=0032) but only the difference between the high rate and lower rate

inorganic means was significant (high rategtlower rate Plt001)

The aggregate contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator species (NI)

showed a very marked divergence between treatments over time (Fig 1d) with NI

either changing little or declining under most treatments again with the notable exception

of high rate annual FYM (Tr 5) under which NI increased over time Time treatment

and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001) The

predominant temporal trend was downward (from 25 of live cover in 1999 to 14 in

2010 averaged over all treatments) but NI for Treatment 5 had significantly increased

compared to 1999 in 2002 2003 (Plt005) 2005 (Plt0001) 2008 (Plt0001) and 2009

(Plt001) but not in 2010 (Fig 1d) The most marked declines in NI occurred on the

limed control (Tr 2) nil fertilizer plus lime in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) and the lower

rate triennial inorganic fertilizer treatments (Tr 11) differences compared to both 1999

and 2002 were highly significant (Plt0001) in most subsequent years for these

treatments A smaller decline also occurred after 2002 on the treatment equivalent to past

inputs (ie12 t ha-1

year-1

annual FYM Tr 4) In most years this treatment differed little

from the equivalent FYM treatment limed in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 14)

These trends were reflected in highly significant overall effects on NI within the FRF

series of form (FYMgtinorganic) rate (mediumlthigh) and frequency (triennialltannual)

(all effects Plt0001) Time x rate and time x frequency interactions were both significant

(P=0019 and Plt0001 respectively) with a marginally non-significant rate x frequency

interaction averaged over all years (P=0054) NI declined over time under both

application rates averaged over forms and frequencies of application but the decline was

slower with high rate treatments compared to lower rate Difference between rates were

significant in all years from 2002 onwards (Plt005 in 2002 2006 and 2007 Plt0001 in

other years) Overall differences due to frequency of application were even more marked

Under annual application NI declined initially from 2003-2006 compared to 1999 but

subsequently recovered and did not differ from 1999 levels from 2007 onwards whilst

under triennial application differences were highly significant (Plt0001) compared to

1999 from 2003 onwards with significant differences between years during this same

period (Plt005 in 2003 and 2006 Plt0001 in remaining years)

Repeated-measures ANOVAs within the LFF treatment series at the upland meadow

showed no overall effect of liming regime on temporal trends for any of the above

variables nor any interaction of lime with either time or FYM frequency - note that FYM

was applied at the intermediate rate (12 t ha-1

) in all FYM treatments within this series

The overall effect of FYM frequency was significant for both PI (P=0003) and the

number of NI species m-2

(P=0001) PI was highest with nil FYM and lowest with

annual FYM with triennial intermediate and differing significantly (Plt005) from the

other two means NI species m-2

did not differ between triennial and annual application

within the LFF series but both were significantly higher than nil FYM (Plt001 for

triennial Plt0001 for annual application) There was also a significant time x FYM

frequency interaction for NI within this series (P=0001) reflecting a more rapid

13

decline with nil FYM than with triennial FYM and no significant overall trend with

annual FYM when averaged over both lime treatments

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Spe

cie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime Year 1 + ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr 1)

a Species richness (total)

2

3

4

5

6

7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

Fig 2 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition at a lowland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control treatment and those that had received lime in year 1

Treatments 1 and 2 were identical (nil input) until 2005

The lowland meadow

Both time and treatment were significant within the ANOVA for total species-richness at

the lowland meadow (Plt0001 and P=0009 respectively and in contrast to the upland

site the treatment x time interaction was significant (P=0012) Averaged over all years

high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was significantly less species-rich than all others

except Treatment 14 (annual FYM at 12 t ha-1

limed in 1999) having declined

progressively between 1999 and 2009 (Fig 2a) with most differences significant at

Plt001 Treatment 14 did not differ significantly overall compared to the corresponding

FYM treatment not limed until 2005 (Tr 4) although these two treatments showed

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 8: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

8

blocks was accounted for by treating replicate as a blocking factor The first model included all

the treatments except Treatment 1 at the upland meadow whilst the other two models used

balanced factorial subsets (series) of treatments (see Table 2) the Form x Rate x Frequency

(FRF) series and the Lime x FYM frequency (LFF) series

The FRF series tested the effects of form of fertilizer (ie FYM or inorganic) the rate at which

fertilizers were applied (12 or 24 t FYM ha-1

and inorganic treatments corresponding to these)

the frequency at which treatments were applied (ie annual or triennially) and all two- and three-

way interactions between these factors

The LFF series tested the effects of liming regime ie lime in 1999 (and 2005 at the upland site)

versus lime in 2005 only the frequency of FYM application (ie nil annual or triennially) and the

Lime x FYM frequency interaction All FYM treatments within this series were applied at 12 t ha-

1 At both sites the LFF series consisted of Treatments 2 4 7 13 14 and 15 (see Table 2) The

liming comparison therefore differed slightly between the two sites since liming was repeated in

2005 on plots previously limed in 1999 at the upland meadow but not repeated at the lowland

one

In both the LFF and the FRF models for each variable the first stratum of the ANOVA

consisted of the effects of all factors and interactions averaged over time with the same factors

and interactions repeated in the second stratum with time as an additional factor

In all repeated measures ANOVAs to account for the repeated measures aspect all degrees of

freedom in the Year x Treatment stratum were adjusted to account for departure from

homogeneity of the population covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the

Greenhouse-Geisser method (Genstat V Committee 1997)

In most years including 2010 all species were recorded individually but at both sites

bryophytes were recorded only as a single group in some years This had only a small influence

on the data since there were seldom more than two bryophyte species present in a quadrat and

more often less Nevertheless for consistency between years bryophytes were treated as a single

group in all years when calculating total species-richness for data for repeated measures

ANOVAs

In addition to the above analyses 2010 data for the key variables were tested alone for treatment

effects by ANOVA and by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) the latter using 1999 data as the

covariate (Genstat 5 Committee 1997) All three models as described above were tested The

ANCOVAs for the upland meadow excluded Treatment 1 (untreated control plots established in

2005) Where an ANCOVA showed significant treatment covariance with 1999 data the adjusted

results were used In other cases the unadjusted analyses were used Individual bryophyte species

were included in the calculations of species-richness at both sites in these analyses

In all analyses in order to satisfy the conditions for ANOVA (normality of residuals and

homogeneity of residual variation) all percentage data were transformed before analysis by

arcsine(radicp) where p is the percentage value expressed as a proportion All results quoted for

percentage data refer to analyses of arcsine-square root transformed data

Mixed modeling

Mixed model analysis (Residual Estimated Maximum Likelihood ndash REML Genstat V

Committee 1997) was used to identify any effect of form rate or frequency of application on

vegetation composition at each site in 2010 not simply attributable to the total (or mean per year)

amount of fertilizer applied over the study period A variable representing this amount was

included as a continuous explanatory variable in each analysis along with other fixed factors

form rate and frequency of application (Block was included as a random factor) Since the total

(or mean) amounts of N P and K applied over the whole period were completely correlated

across treatments at each site it was not feasible to include all three elements as separate terms in

the model Nor was it feasible to simply use a single notional variable for fertilizer amount (eg t

9

FYM ha-1

year-1

or inorganic equivalent) since there was lack of equivalence of N and P supply

(but not K) between individual FYM treatments and their corresponding inorganic treatments For

each dependent variable tested two separate models were therefore developed using either N or

P ha-1

year-1

as the continuous variable In each case the presence of any non-linearity in response

was tested by including a quadratic term (ie N2 or P

2) or where more appropriate by logn-

transformation of the explanatory variable

For each analysis an initial model was constructed that included all five main effects and all

interactions The importance of each term was evaluated initially by a χ2 test on the Wald statistic

(Genstat V Committee 1997) The number and order of terms in the model were varied but with

N or P amount always included until a model was developed in which each term was significant

The model was then refined by testing the contribution of each term to the model by the more

conservative deviance test ie a χ2 test on the difference in deviance between the model

containing the term and a sub-model from which it was dropped (Welham amp Thompson 1997)

Where there was an interaction between form of fertilizer and the quadratic term but no overall

effect of form - implying that the difference between the two forms of fertilizer lay primarily in a

difference in the curvilinearity of response - a refined model was tested with the P2 (or N

2) x

Form term replaced by Form nested within the quadratic term (eg P2Form) This has the effect

of absorbing the overall effect of form of fertilizer within the interaction term and returns the two

terms P2 and P

2 x Form (Galwey 2006)

These modeling approaches were used with total species-richness and PI species-richness as

(separate) response variables and included data for all treatments limed in 2005 but not in 1999

(ie Trs 2-12)

Results

TEMPORAL CHANGES 1999-2010

Changes over time in total species-richness (number per m2) richness and proportional

aggregate cover of positive indicator (PI) species and proportional aggregate cover of

negative indicator (NI) species at the upland and lowland meadows are represented in

Figs 1 and 2 respectively for ten of the fifteen treatments applied Repeated measures

ANOVA statistics for each of the four variables are given in Supporting Information

Tables S4 S6 S8 and S10 respectively for the upland meadow and Tables S12 S14 S16

and S18 respectively for the lowland meadow Corresponding mean values for each

treatment in each year are given in Tables S5 S7 S9 S11 S13 S15 S17 and S19

respectively Changes in individual species abundance contributing to the temporal trends

in aggregated PI and NI species described below are outlined under Supporting

Information

The upland meadow

The overall effects of both treatment and time were highly significant in the repeated

measures ANOVA for total species-richness at the upland meadow (both P=0001) but

there was no treatment x time interaction (P=0647)

After an initial decline between 1999 and 2000 species-richness remained fairly

constant for most treatments until 2003 after which there was a general increase with the

notable exception of the highest rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) (Fig 1a) The latter

treatment declined further between 2005 and 2007 after which it appeared to recover

slightly and averaged over all years this treatment was significantly less species-rich than

all others (Plt001 compared to Tr 14 Plt0001 the remainder) None of the remaining

10

treatments differed significantly from the limed control treatment (Tr2) averaged over all

years However the more species-rich treatments ie nil fertilizer plus lime applied in

both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) low rate annual and medium rate triennial FYM (Tr 3 and 7

respectively) and the inorganic equivalent to the latter (Tr 11) were all more species-rich

averaged over all years (Plt005) than annual FYM at the medium rate under either

liming regime (ie Trs 4 and 14 the former representing a continuation of past

management)

The effect of the high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was largely responsible for

several main effects within the repeated measures ANOVA of treatments within the Form

x Rate x Frequency (FRF) factorial series namely overall effects (averaged over all

years) of rate (mediumgthigh P=0002) and frequency (triennialgtannual P=0001) of

application and a not quite significant effect of form of fertilizer (FYMltinorganic

P=0057) Both the form x rate and the form x frequency interactions were significant

(both Plt005) high rate FYM was significantly less species-rich than all other

combinations averaged over annual and three yearly treatments and all years (Plt0001

compared to medium rate FYM Plt001 compared to both medium and high rate

inorganic fertilizer) and annual FYM was less species-rich than three yearly FYM and

than inorganic fertilizer either annually or triennial (all Plt0001) averaged over the two

application rates and all years The rate x frequency interaction was not significant

(P=0105) but there was a marginally non-significant three-way interaction between

form rate and frequency (P=0070) with a low mean for high rate annual FYM (Tr 5

211 species m-2

) contrasting markedly with all other treatments within the series

particularly with low rate triennial FYM (Tr 6 267 species m-2

)

As with the full treatment ANOVA the overall time factor was highly significant

(Plt0001) but only the effect of application frequency varied significantly with time

(interaction Plt005) Species-richness declined slightly with annual treatments overall

and increased slightly with triennial treatments such that differences between these were

significant in all years from 2005 onwards (Plt001 for 2006-2009 Plt005 in 2005 and

2010)

Both the richness and aggregate cover of PI species (PI) increased generally with time

(Fig 1b and 1c) although in both cases there was a progressive separation between

species The temporal trend was particularly marked for PI although the time factor

was highly significant (Plt0001) in both ANOVAs The overall treatment effect was

marginally non-significant for PI richness (P=0069) with no indication of a time x

treatment interaction (P=0703) whereas for PI there was both a significant treatment

effect (P=0002) and a marginally non-significant treatment x time interaction (P=0075)

Mean PI was significantly lower averaged over all years for annual FYM treatments at

both 12 and 24 t ha-1

(ie Trs 4 14 and 5) compared to several other treatments notably

nil fertilizer treatments limed either in 2005 only (Tr 2 limed control) or in both 1999

and 2005 (Tr 13) (all differences Plt0001 except Tr 2 vs Tr 4 Plt001) and triennial

inorganic treatments (Trs 11 and 12 Plt001 except for Tr 4 vs Tr 11 Plt005) Within

the FRF series ANOVA the increase in PI over time was greater with triennial

treatments compared to annual averaged over fertilizer forms and rates of application

(time x frequency interaction P=0016) with a marked overall difference due to

application frequency averaged over forms rates and all years (P=0005)

11

PI species-richness showed a similar overall effect of application frequency within the

FRF series (triennialgtannual P=0013) and also a significant overall effect of rate of

application (medium rategthigh rate P=0022) The overall effect of form of fertilizer was

marginally non-significant (FYMltinorganic P=0059) and there was no significant

interaction among any of the three factors averaged over all years nor any interaction

with time

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Specie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime in Year 1+ ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime in Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr1)

a Species richness (total)

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

Fig 1 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition an upland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control

The mean number of negative indicator (NI) species per m2 averaged over all treatments

varied significantly over time at the upland meadow (P=0002 data not shown) though

with no consistent trend - it was lowest overall in 2002 (499 per m2) and highest in both

1999 and 2008 (548 per m2) The treatment x time interaction was not significant

(P=0469) but the overall treatment effect was highly significant (Plt0001) mean

number of NI species per m2 was higher than the limed control (Tr 1 453 per m

2) with

all fertilizer treatments except Treatments 11 (triennial inorganic fertilizer at the lower

rate) and 13 (nil fertilizer limed in both 1999 and 2005) (Plt0001 for all except Trs 5

and 6 for which Plt001) The highest mean NI m-2

value was for high rate inorganic

12

fertilizer (Tr 10 565 per m2) which differed significantly (Plt005) from its FYM

counterpart Treatment 5 There was however no consistent difference between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts and no overall effect of form of fertilizer

within the FRF series (P=0745) There was a significant form x rate interaction within

this ANOVA (P=0032) but only the difference between the high rate and lower rate

inorganic means was significant (high rategtlower rate Plt001)

The aggregate contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator species (NI)

showed a very marked divergence between treatments over time (Fig 1d) with NI

either changing little or declining under most treatments again with the notable exception

of high rate annual FYM (Tr 5) under which NI increased over time Time treatment

and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001) The

predominant temporal trend was downward (from 25 of live cover in 1999 to 14 in

2010 averaged over all treatments) but NI for Treatment 5 had significantly increased

compared to 1999 in 2002 2003 (Plt005) 2005 (Plt0001) 2008 (Plt0001) and 2009

(Plt001) but not in 2010 (Fig 1d) The most marked declines in NI occurred on the

limed control (Tr 2) nil fertilizer plus lime in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) and the lower

rate triennial inorganic fertilizer treatments (Tr 11) differences compared to both 1999

and 2002 were highly significant (Plt0001) in most subsequent years for these

treatments A smaller decline also occurred after 2002 on the treatment equivalent to past

inputs (ie12 t ha-1

year-1

annual FYM Tr 4) In most years this treatment differed little

from the equivalent FYM treatment limed in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 14)

These trends were reflected in highly significant overall effects on NI within the FRF

series of form (FYMgtinorganic) rate (mediumlthigh) and frequency (triennialltannual)

(all effects Plt0001) Time x rate and time x frequency interactions were both significant

(P=0019 and Plt0001 respectively) with a marginally non-significant rate x frequency

interaction averaged over all years (P=0054) NI declined over time under both

application rates averaged over forms and frequencies of application but the decline was

slower with high rate treatments compared to lower rate Difference between rates were

significant in all years from 2002 onwards (Plt005 in 2002 2006 and 2007 Plt0001 in

other years) Overall differences due to frequency of application were even more marked

Under annual application NI declined initially from 2003-2006 compared to 1999 but

subsequently recovered and did not differ from 1999 levels from 2007 onwards whilst

under triennial application differences were highly significant (Plt0001) compared to

1999 from 2003 onwards with significant differences between years during this same

period (Plt005 in 2003 and 2006 Plt0001 in remaining years)

Repeated-measures ANOVAs within the LFF treatment series at the upland meadow

showed no overall effect of liming regime on temporal trends for any of the above

variables nor any interaction of lime with either time or FYM frequency - note that FYM

was applied at the intermediate rate (12 t ha-1

) in all FYM treatments within this series

The overall effect of FYM frequency was significant for both PI (P=0003) and the

number of NI species m-2

(P=0001) PI was highest with nil FYM and lowest with

annual FYM with triennial intermediate and differing significantly (Plt005) from the

other two means NI species m-2

did not differ between triennial and annual application

within the LFF series but both were significantly higher than nil FYM (Plt001 for

triennial Plt0001 for annual application) There was also a significant time x FYM

frequency interaction for NI within this series (P=0001) reflecting a more rapid

13

decline with nil FYM than with triennial FYM and no significant overall trend with

annual FYM when averaged over both lime treatments

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Spe

cie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime Year 1 + ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr 1)

a Species richness (total)

2

3

4

5

6

7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

Fig 2 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition at a lowland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control treatment and those that had received lime in year 1

Treatments 1 and 2 were identical (nil input) until 2005

The lowland meadow

Both time and treatment were significant within the ANOVA for total species-richness at

the lowland meadow (Plt0001 and P=0009 respectively and in contrast to the upland

site the treatment x time interaction was significant (P=0012) Averaged over all years

high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was significantly less species-rich than all others

except Treatment 14 (annual FYM at 12 t ha-1

limed in 1999) having declined

progressively between 1999 and 2009 (Fig 2a) with most differences significant at

Plt001 Treatment 14 did not differ significantly overall compared to the corresponding

FYM treatment not limed until 2005 (Tr 4) although these two treatments showed

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 9: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

9

FYM ha-1

year-1

or inorganic equivalent) since there was lack of equivalence of N and P supply

(but not K) between individual FYM treatments and their corresponding inorganic treatments For

each dependent variable tested two separate models were therefore developed using either N or

P ha-1

year-1

as the continuous variable In each case the presence of any non-linearity in response

was tested by including a quadratic term (ie N2 or P

2) or where more appropriate by logn-

transformation of the explanatory variable

For each analysis an initial model was constructed that included all five main effects and all

interactions The importance of each term was evaluated initially by a χ2 test on the Wald statistic

(Genstat V Committee 1997) The number and order of terms in the model were varied but with

N or P amount always included until a model was developed in which each term was significant

The model was then refined by testing the contribution of each term to the model by the more

conservative deviance test ie a χ2 test on the difference in deviance between the model

containing the term and a sub-model from which it was dropped (Welham amp Thompson 1997)

Where there was an interaction between form of fertilizer and the quadratic term but no overall

effect of form - implying that the difference between the two forms of fertilizer lay primarily in a

difference in the curvilinearity of response - a refined model was tested with the P2 (or N

2) x

Form term replaced by Form nested within the quadratic term (eg P2Form) This has the effect

of absorbing the overall effect of form of fertilizer within the interaction term and returns the two

terms P2 and P

2 x Form (Galwey 2006)

These modeling approaches were used with total species-richness and PI species-richness as

(separate) response variables and included data for all treatments limed in 2005 but not in 1999

(ie Trs 2-12)

Results

TEMPORAL CHANGES 1999-2010

Changes over time in total species-richness (number per m2) richness and proportional

aggregate cover of positive indicator (PI) species and proportional aggregate cover of

negative indicator (NI) species at the upland and lowland meadows are represented in

Figs 1 and 2 respectively for ten of the fifteen treatments applied Repeated measures

ANOVA statistics for each of the four variables are given in Supporting Information

Tables S4 S6 S8 and S10 respectively for the upland meadow and Tables S12 S14 S16

and S18 respectively for the lowland meadow Corresponding mean values for each

treatment in each year are given in Tables S5 S7 S9 S11 S13 S15 S17 and S19

respectively Changes in individual species abundance contributing to the temporal trends

in aggregated PI and NI species described below are outlined under Supporting

Information

The upland meadow

The overall effects of both treatment and time were highly significant in the repeated

measures ANOVA for total species-richness at the upland meadow (both P=0001) but

there was no treatment x time interaction (P=0647)

After an initial decline between 1999 and 2000 species-richness remained fairly

constant for most treatments until 2003 after which there was a general increase with the

notable exception of the highest rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) (Fig 1a) The latter

treatment declined further between 2005 and 2007 after which it appeared to recover

slightly and averaged over all years this treatment was significantly less species-rich than

all others (Plt001 compared to Tr 14 Plt0001 the remainder) None of the remaining

10

treatments differed significantly from the limed control treatment (Tr2) averaged over all

years However the more species-rich treatments ie nil fertilizer plus lime applied in

both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) low rate annual and medium rate triennial FYM (Tr 3 and 7

respectively) and the inorganic equivalent to the latter (Tr 11) were all more species-rich

averaged over all years (Plt005) than annual FYM at the medium rate under either

liming regime (ie Trs 4 and 14 the former representing a continuation of past

management)

The effect of the high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was largely responsible for

several main effects within the repeated measures ANOVA of treatments within the Form

x Rate x Frequency (FRF) factorial series namely overall effects (averaged over all

years) of rate (mediumgthigh P=0002) and frequency (triennialgtannual P=0001) of

application and a not quite significant effect of form of fertilizer (FYMltinorganic

P=0057) Both the form x rate and the form x frequency interactions were significant

(both Plt005) high rate FYM was significantly less species-rich than all other

combinations averaged over annual and three yearly treatments and all years (Plt0001

compared to medium rate FYM Plt001 compared to both medium and high rate

inorganic fertilizer) and annual FYM was less species-rich than three yearly FYM and

than inorganic fertilizer either annually or triennial (all Plt0001) averaged over the two

application rates and all years The rate x frequency interaction was not significant

(P=0105) but there was a marginally non-significant three-way interaction between

form rate and frequency (P=0070) with a low mean for high rate annual FYM (Tr 5

211 species m-2

) contrasting markedly with all other treatments within the series

particularly with low rate triennial FYM (Tr 6 267 species m-2

)

As with the full treatment ANOVA the overall time factor was highly significant

(Plt0001) but only the effect of application frequency varied significantly with time

(interaction Plt005) Species-richness declined slightly with annual treatments overall

and increased slightly with triennial treatments such that differences between these were

significant in all years from 2005 onwards (Plt001 for 2006-2009 Plt005 in 2005 and

2010)

Both the richness and aggregate cover of PI species (PI) increased generally with time

(Fig 1b and 1c) although in both cases there was a progressive separation between

species The temporal trend was particularly marked for PI although the time factor

was highly significant (Plt0001) in both ANOVAs The overall treatment effect was

marginally non-significant for PI richness (P=0069) with no indication of a time x

treatment interaction (P=0703) whereas for PI there was both a significant treatment

effect (P=0002) and a marginally non-significant treatment x time interaction (P=0075)

Mean PI was significantly lower averaged over all years for annual FYM treatments at

both 12 and 24 t ha-1

(ie Trs 4 14 and 5) compared to several other treatments notably

nil fertilizer treatments limed either in 2005 only (Tr 2 limed control) or in both 1999

and 2005 (Tr 13) (all differences Plt0001 except Tr 2 vs Tr 4 Plt001) and triennial

inorganic treatments (Trs 11 and 12 Plt001 except for Tr 4 vs Tr 11 Plt005) Within

the FRF series ANOVA the increase in PI over time was greater with triennial

treatments compared to annual averaged over fertilizer forms and rates of application

(time x frequency interaction P=0016) with a marked overall difference due to

application frequency averaged over forms rates and all years (P=0005)

11

PI species-richness showed a similar overall effect of application frequency within the

FRF series (triennialgtannual P=0013) and also a significant overall effect of rate of

application (medium rategthigh rate P=0022) The overall effect of form of fertilizer was

marginally non-significant (FYMltinorganic P=0059) and there was no significant

interaction among any of the three factors averaged over all years nor any interaction

with time

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Specie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime in Year 1+ ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime in Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr1)

a Species richness (total)

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

Fig 1 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition an upland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control

The mean number of negative indicator (NI) species per m2 averaged over all treatments

varied significantly over time at the upland meadow (P=0002 data not shown) though

with no consistent trend - it was lowest overall in 2002 (499 per m2) and highest in both

1999 and 2008 (548 per m2) The treatment x time interaction was not significant

(P=0469) but the overall treatment effect was highly significant (Plt0001) mean

number of NI species per m2 was higher than the limed control (Tr 1 453 per m

2) with

all fertilizer treatments except Treatments 11 (triennial inorganic fertilizer at the lower

rate) and 13 (nil fertilizer limed in both 1999 and 2005) (Plt0001 for all except Trs 5

and 6 for which Plt001) The highest mean NI m-2

value was for high rate inorganic

12

fertilizer (Tr 10 565 per m2) which differed significantly (Plt005) from its FYM

counterpart Treatment 5 There was however no consistent difference between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts and no overall effect of form of fertilizer

within the FRF series (P=0745) There was a significant form x rate interaction within

this ANOVA (P=0032) but only the difference between the high rate and lower rate

inorganic means was significant (high rategtlower rate Plt001)

The aggregate contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator species (NI)

showed a very marked divergence between treatments over time (Fig 1d) with NI

either changing little or declining under most treatments again with the notable exception

of high rate annual FYM (Tr 5) under which NI increased over time Time treatment

and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001) The

predominant temporal trend was downward (from 25 of live cover in 1999 to 14 in

2010 averaged over all treatments) but NI for Treatment 5 had significantly increased

compared to 1999 in 2002 2003 (Plt005) 2005 (Plt0001) 2008 (Plt0001) and 2009

(Plt001) but not in 2010 (Fig 1d) The most marked declines in NI occurred on the

limed control (Tr 2) nil fertilizer plus lime in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) and the lower

rate triennial inorganic fertilizer treatments (Tr 11) differences compared to both 1999

and 2002 were highly significant (Plt0001) in most subsequent years for these

treatments A smaller decline also occurred after 2002 on the treatment equivalent to past

inputs (ie12 t ha-1

year-1

annual FYM Tr 4) In most years this treatment differed little

from the equivalent FYM treatment limed in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 14)

These trends were reflected in highly significant overall effects on NI within the FRF

series of form (FYMgtinorganic) rate (mediumlthigh) and frequency (triennialltannual)

(all effects Plt0001) Time x rate and time x frequency interactions were both significant

(P=0019 and Plt0001 respectively) with a marginally non-significant rate x frequency

interaction averaged over all years (P=0054) NI declined over time under both

application rates averaged over forms and frequencies of application but the decline was

slower with high rate treatments compared to lower rate Difference between rates were

significant in all years from 2002 onwards (Plt005 in 2002 2006 and 2007 Plt0001 in

other years) Overall differences due to frequency of application were even more marked

Under annual application NI declined initially from 2003-2006 compared to 1999 but

subsequently recovered and did not differ from 1999 levels from 2007 onwards whilst

under triennial application differences were highly significant (Plt0001) compared to

1999 from 2003 onwards with significant differences between years during this same

period (Plt005 in 2003 and 2006 Plt0001 in remaining years)

Repeated-measures ANOVAs within the LFF treatment series at the upland meadow

showed no overall effect of liming regime on temporal trends for any of the above

variables nor any interaction of lime with either time or FYM frequency - note that FYM

was applied at the intermediate rate (12 t ha-1

) in all FYM treatments within this series

The overall effect of FYM frequency was significant for both PI (P=0003) and the

number of NI species m-2

(P=0001) PI was highest with nil FYM and lowest with

annual FYM with triennial intermediate and differing significantly (Plt005) from the

other two means NI species m-2

did not differ between triennial and annual application

within the LFF series but both were significantly higher than nil FYM (Plt001 for

triennial Plt0001 for annual application) There was also a significant time x FYM

frequency interaction for NI within this series (P=0001) reflecting a more rapid

13

decline with nil FYM than with triennial FYM and no significant overall trend with

annual FYM when averaged over both lime treatments

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Spe

cie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime Year 1 + ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr 1)

a Species richness (total)

2

3

4

5

6

7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

Fig 2 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition at a lowland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control treatment and those that had received lime in year 1

Treatments 1 and 2 were identical (nil input) until 2005

The lowland meadow

Both time and treatment were significant within the ANOVA for total species-richness at

the lowland meadow (Plt0001 and P=0009 respectively and in contrast to the upland

site the treatment x time interaction was significant (P=0012) Averaged over all years

high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was significantly less species-rich than all others

except Treatment 14 (annual FYM at 12 t ha-1

limed in 1999) having declined

progressively between 1999 and 2009 (Fig 2a) with most differences significant at

Plt001 Treatment 14 did not differ significantly overall compared to the corresponding

FYM treatment not limed until 2005 (Tr 4) although these two treatments showed

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 10: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

10

treatments differed significantly from the limed control treatment (Tr2) averaged over all

years However the more species-rich treatments ie nil fertilizer plus lime applied in

both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) low rate annual and medium rate triennial FYM (Tr 3 and 7

respectively) and the inorganic equivalent to the latter (Tr 11) were all more species-rich

averaged over all years (Plt005) than annual FYM at the medium rate under either

liming regime (ie Trs 4 and 14 the former representing a continuation of past

management)

The effect of the high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was largely responsible for

several main effects within the repeated measures ANOVA of treatments within the Form

x Rate x Frequency (FRF) factorial series namely overall effects (averaged over all

years) of rate (mediumgthigh P=0002) and frequency (triennialgtannual P=0001) of

application and a not quite significant effect of form of fertilizer (FYMltinorganic

P=0057) Both the form x rate and the form x frequency interactions were significant

(both Plt005) high rate FYM was significantly less species-rich than all other

combinations averaged over annual and three yearly treatments and all years (Plt0001

compared to medium rate FYM Plt001 compared to both medium and high rate

inorganic fertilizer) and annual FYM was less species-rich than three yearly FYM and

than inorganic fertilizer either annually or triennial (all Plt0001) averaged over the two

application rates and all years The rate x frequency interaction was not significant

(P=0105) but there was a marginally non-significant three-way interaction between

form rate and frequency (P=0070) with a low mean for high rate annual FYM (Tr 5

211 species m-2

) contrasting markedly with all other treatments within the series

particularly with low rate triennial FYM (Tr 6 267 species m-2

)

As with the full treatment ANOVA the overall time factor was highly significant

(Plt0001) but only the effect of application frequency varied significantly with time

(interaction Plt005) Species-richness declined slightly with annual treatments overall

and increased slightly with triennial treatments such that differences between these were

significant in all years from 2005 onwards (Plt001 for 2006-2009 Plt005 in 2005 and

2010)

Both the richness and aggregate cover of PI species (PI) increased generally with time

(Fig 1b and 1c) although in both cases there was a progressive separation between

species The temporal trend was particularly marked for PI although the time factor

was highly significant (Plt0001) in both ANOVAs The overall treatment effect was

marginally non-significant for PI richness (P=0069) with no indication of a time x

treatment interaction (P=0703) whereas for PI there was both a significant treatment

effect (P=0002) and a marginally non-significant treatment x time interaction (P=0075)

Mean PI was significantly lower averaged over all years for annual FYM treatments at

both 12 and 24 t ha-1

(ie Trs 4 14 and 5) compared to several other treatments notably

nil fertilizer treatments limed either in 2005 only (Tr 2 limed control) or in both 1999

and 2005 (Tr 13) (all differences Plt0001 except Tr 2 vs Tr 4 Plt001) and triennial

inorganic treatments (Trs 11 and 12 Plt001 except for Tr 4 vs Tr 11 Plt005) Within

the FRF series ANOVA the increase in PI over time was greater with triennial

treatments compared to annual averaged over fertilizer forms and rates of application

(time x frequency interaction P=0016) with a marked overall difference due to

application frequency averaged over forms rates and all years (P=0005)

11

PI species-richness showed a similar overall effect of application frequency within the

FRF series (triennialgtannual P=0013) and also a significant overall effect of rate of

application (medium rategthigh rate P=0022) The overall effect of form of fertilizer was

marginally non-significant (FYMltinorganic P=0059) and there was no significant

interaction among any of the three factors averaged over all years nor any interaction

with time

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Specie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime in Year 1+ ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime in Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr1)

a Species richness (total)

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

Fig 1 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition an upland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control

The mean number of negative indicator (NI) species per m2 averaged over all treatments

varied significantly over time at the upland meadow (P=0002 data not shown) though

with no consistent trend - it was lowest overall in 2002 (499 per m2) and highest in both

1999 and 2008 (548 per m2) The treatment x time interaction was not significant

(P=0469) but the overall treatment effect was highly significant (Plt0001) mean

number of NI species per m2 was higher than the limed control (Tr 1 453 per m

2) with

all fertilizer treatments except Treatments 11 (triennial inorganic fertilizer at the lower

rate) and 13 (nil fertilizer limed in both 1999 and 2005) (Plt0001 for all except Trs 5

and 6 for which Plt001) The highest mean NI m-2

value was for high rate inorganic

12

fertilizer (Tr 10 565 per m2) which differed significantly (Plt005) from its FYM

counterpart Treatment 5 There was however no consistent difference between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts and no overall effect of form of fertilizer

within the FRF series (P=0745) There was a significant form x rate interaction within

this ANOVA (P=0032) but only the difference between the high rate and lower rate

inorganic means was significant (high rategtlower rate Plt001)

The aggregate contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator species (NI)

showed a very marked divergence between treatments over time (Fig 1d) with NI

either changing little or declining under most treatments again with the notable exception

of high rate annual FYM (Tr 5) under which NI increased over time Time treatment

and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001) The

predominant temporal trend was downward (from 25 of live cover in 1999 to 14 in

2010 averaged over all treatments) but NI for Treatment 5 had significantly increased

compared to 1999 in 2002 2003 (Plt005) 2005 (Plt0001) 2008 (Plt0001) and 2009

(Plt001) but not in 2010 (Fig 1d) The most marked declines in NI occurred on the

limed control (Tr 2) nil fertilizer plus lime in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) and the lower

rate triennial inorganic fertilizer treatments (Tr 11) differences compared to both 1999

and 2002 were highly significant (Plt0001) in most subsequent years for these

treatments A smaller decline also occurred after 2002 on the treatment equivalent to past

inputs (ie12 t ha-1

year-1

annual FYM Tr 4) In most years this treatment differed little

from the equivalent FYM treatment limed in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 14)

These trends were reflected in highly significant overall effects on NI within the FRF

series of form (FYMgtinorganic) rate (mediumlthigh) and frequency (triennialltannual)

(all effects Plt0001) Time x rate and time x frequency interactions were both significant

(P=0019 and Plt0001 respectively) with a marginally non-significant rate x frequency

interaction averaged over all years (P=0054) NI declined over time under both

application rates averaged over forms and frequencies of application but the decline was

slower with high rate treatments compared to lower rate Difference between rates were

significant in all years from 2002 onwards (Plt005 in 2002 2006 and 2007 Plt0001 in

other years) Overall differences due to frequency of application were even more marked

Under annual application NI declined initially from 2003-2006 compared to 1999 but

subsequently recovered and did not differ from 1999 levels from 2007 onwards whilst

under triennial application differences were highly significant (Plt0001) compared to

1999 from 2003 onwards with significant differences between years during this same

period (Plt005 in 2003 and 2006 Plt0001 in remaining years)

Repeated-measures ANOVAs within the LFF treatment series at the upland meadow

showed no overall effect of liming regime on temporal trends for any of the above

variables nor any interaction of lime with either time or FYM frequency - note that FYM

was applied at the intermediate rate (12 t ha-1

) in all FYM treatments within this series

The overall effect of FYM frequency was significant for both PI (P=0003) and the

number of NI species m-2

(P=0001) PI was highest with nil FYM and lowest with

annual FYM with triennial intermediate and differing significantly (Plt005) from the

other two means NI species m-2

did not differ between triennial and annual application

within the LFF series but both were significantly higher than nil FYM (Plt001 for

triennial Plt0001 for annual application) There was also a significant time x FYM

frequency interaction for NI within this series (P=0001) reflecting a more rapid

13

decline with nil FYM than with triennial FYM and no significant overall trend with

annual FYM when averaged over both lime treatments

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Spe

cie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime Year 1 + ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr 1)

a Species richness (total)

2

3

4

5

6

7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

Fig 2 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition at a lowland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control treatment and those that had received lime in year 1

Treatments 1 and 2 were identical (nil input) until 2005

The lowland meadow

Both time and treatment were significant within the ANOVA for total species-richness at

the lowland meadow (Plt0001 and P=0009 respectively and in contrast to the upland

site the treatment x time interaction was significant (P=0012) Averaged over all years

high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was significantly less species-rich than all others

except Treatment 14 (annual FYM at 12 t ha-1

limed in 1999) having declined

progressively between 1999 and 2009 (Fig 2a) with most differences significant at

Plt001 Treatment 14 did not differ significantly overall compared to the corresponding

FYM treatment not limed until 2005 (Tr 4) although these two treatments showed

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 11: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

11

PI species-richness showed a similar overall effect of application frequency within the

FRF series (triennialgtannual P=0013) and also a significant overall effect of rate of

application (medium rategthigh rate P=0022) The overall effect of form of fertilizer was

marginally non-significant (FYMltinorganic P=0059) and there was no significant

interaction among any of the three factors averaged over all years nor any interaction

with time

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Specie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime in Year 1+ ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime in Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr1)

a Species richness (total)

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

Fig 1 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition an upland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control

The mean number of negative indicator (NI) species per m2 averaged over all treatments

varied significantly over time at the upland meadow (P=0002 data not shown) though

with no consistent trend - it was lowest overall in 2002 (499 per m2) and highest in both

1999 and 2008 (548 per m2) The treatment x time interaction was not significant

(P=0469) but the overall treatment effect was highly significant (Plt0001) mean

number of NI species per m2 was higher than the limed control (Tr 1 453 per m

2) with

all fertilizer treatments except Treatments 11 (triennial inorganic fertilizer at the lower

rate) and 13 (nil fertilizer limed in both 1999 and 2005) (Plt0001 for all except Trs 5

and 6 for which Plt001) The highest mean NI m-2

value was for high rate inorganic

12

fertilizer (Tr 10 565 per m2) which differed significantly (Plt005) from its FYM

counterpart Treatment 5 There was however no consistent difference between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts and no overall effect of form of fertilizer

within the FRF series (P=0745) There was a significant form x rate interaction within

this ANOVA (P=0032) but only the difference between the high rate and lower rate

inorganic means was significant (high rategtlower rate Plt001)

The aggregate contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator species (NI)

showed a very marked divergence between treatments over time (Fig 1d) with NI

either changing little or declining under most treatments again with the notable exception

of high rate annual FYM (Tr 5) under which NI increased over time Time treatment

and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001) The

predominant temporal trend was downward (from 25 of live cover in 1999 to 14 in

2010 averaged over all treatments) but NI for Treatment 5 had significantly increased

compared to 1999 in 2002 2003 (Plt005) 2005 (Plt0001) 2008 (Plt0001) and 2009

(Plt001) but not in 2010 (Fig 1d) The most marked declines in NI occurred on the

limed control (Tr 2) nil fertilizer plus lime in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) and the lower

rate triennial inorganic fertilizer treatments (Tr 11) differences compared to both 1999

and 2002 were highly significant (Plt0001) in most subsequent years for these

treatments A smaller decline also occurred after 2002 on the treatment equivalent to past

inputs (ie12 t ha-1

year-1

annual FYM Tr 4) In most years this treatment differed little

from the equivalent FYM treatment limed in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 14)

These trends were reflected in highly significant overall effects on NI within the FRF

series of form (FYMgtinorganic) rate (mediumlthigh) and frequency (triennialltannual)

(all effects Plt0001) Time x rate and time x frequency interactions were both significant

(P=0019 and Plt0001 respectively) with a marginally non-significant rate x frequency

interaction averaged over all years (P=0054) NI declined over time under both

application rates averaged over forms and frequencies of application but the decline was

slower with high rate treatments compared to lower rate Difference between rates were

significant in all years from 2002 onwards (Plt005 in 2002 2006 and 2007 Plt0001 in

other years) Overall differences due to frequency of application were even more marked

Under annual application NI declined initially from 2003-2006 compared to 1999 but

subsequently recovered and did not differ from 1999 levels from 2007 onwards whilst

under triennial application differences were highly significant (Plt0001) compared to

1999 from 2003 onwards with significant differences between years during this same

period (Plt005 in 2003 and 2006 Plt0001 in remaining years)

Repeated-measures ANOVAs within the LFF treatment series at the upland meadow

showed no overall effect of liming regime on temporal trends for any of the above

variables nor any interaction of lime with either time or FYM frequency - note that FYM

was applied at the intermediate rate (12 t ha-1

) in all FYM treatments within this series

The overall effect of FYM frequency was significant for both PI (P=0003) and the

number of NI species m-2

(P=0001) PI was highest with nil FYM and lowest with

annual FYM with triennial intermediate and differing significantly (Plt005) from the

other two means NI species m-2

did not differ between triennial and annual application

within the LFF series but both were significantly higher than nil FYM (Plt001 for

triennial Plt0001 for annual application) There was also a significant time x FYM

frequency interaction for NI within this series (P=0001) reflecting a more rapid

13

decline with nil FYM than with triennial FYM and no significant overall trend with

annual FYM when averaged over both lime treatments

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Spe

cie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime Year 1 + ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr 1)

a Species richness (total)

2

3

4

5

6

7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

Fig 2 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition at a lowland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control treatment and those that had received lime in year 1

Treatments 1 and 2 were identical (nil input) until 2005

The lowland meadow

Both time and treatment were significant within the ANOVA for total species-richness at

the lowland meadow (Plt0001 and P=0009 respectively and in contrast to the upland

site the treatment x time interaction was significant (P=0012) Averaged over all years

high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was significantly less species-rich than all others

except Treatment 14 (annual FYM at 12 t ha-1

limed in 1999) having declined

progressively between 1999 and 2009 (Fig 2a) with most differences significant at

Plt001 Treatment 14 did not differ significantly overall compared to the corresponding

FYM treatment not limed until 2005 (Tr 4) although these two treatments showed

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 12: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

12

fertilizer (Tr 10 565 per m2) which differed significantly (Plt005) from its FYM

counterpart Treatment 5 There was however no consistent difference between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts and no overall effect of form of fertilizer

within the FRF series (P=0745) There was a significant form x rate interaction within

this ANOVA (P=0032) but only the difference between the high rate and lower rate

inorganic means was significant (high rategtlower rate Plt001)

The aggregate contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator species (NI)

showed a very marked divergence between treatments over time (Fig 1d) with NI

either changing little or declining under most treatments again with the notable exception

of high rate annual FYM (Tr 5) under which NI increased over time Time treatment

and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001) The

predominant temporal trend was downward (from 25 of live cover in 1999 to 14 in

2010 averaged over all treatments) but NI for Treatment 5 had significantly increased

compared to 1999 in 2002 2003 (Plt005) 2005 (Plt0001) 2008 (Plt0001) and 2009

(Plt001) but not in 2010 (Fig 1d) The most marked declines in NI occurred on the

limed control (Tr 2) nil fertilizer plus lime in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 13) and the lower

rate triennial inorganic fertilizer treatments (Tr 11) differences compared to both 1999

and 2002 were highly significant (Plt0001) in most subsequent years for these

treatments A smaller decline also occurred after 2002 on the treatment equivalent to past

inputs (ie12 t ha-1

year-1

annual FYM Tr 4) In most years this treatment differed little

from the equivalent FYM treatment limed in both 1999 and 2005 (Tr 14)

These trends were reflected in highly significant overall effects on NI within the FRF

series of form (FYMgtinorganic) rate (mediumlthigh) and frequency (triennialltannual)

(all effects Plt0001) Time x rate and time x frequency interactions were both significant

(P=0019 and Plt0001 respectively) with a marginally non-significant rate x frequency

interaction averaged over all years (P=0054) NI declined over time under both

application rates averaged over forms and frequencies of application but the decline was

slower with high rate treatments compared to lower rate Difference between rates were

significant in all years from 2002 onwards (Plt005 in 2002 2006 and 2007 Plt0001 in

other years) Overall differences due to frequency of application were even more marked

Under annual application NI declined initially from 2003-2006 compared to 1999 but

subsequently recovered and did not differ from 1999 levels from 2007 onwards whilst

under triennial application differences were highly significant (Plt0001) compared to

1999 from 2003 onwards with significant differences between years during this same

period (Plt005 in 2003 and 2006 Plt0001 in remaining years)

Repeated-measures ANOVAs within the LFF treatment series at the upland meadow

showed no overall effect of liming regime on temporal trends for any of the above

variables nor any interaction of lime with either time or FYM frequency - note that FYM

was applied at the intermediate rate (12 t ha-1

) in all FYM treatments within this series

The overall effect of FYM frequency was significant for both PI (P=0003) and the

number of NI species m-2

(P=0001) PI was highest with nil FYM and lowest with

annual FYM with triennial intermediate and differing significantly (Plt005) from the

other two means NI species m-2

did not differ between triennial and annual application

within the LFF series but both were significantly higher than nil FYM (Plt001 for

triennial Plt0001 for annual application) There was also a significant time x FYM

frequency interaction for NI within this series (P=0001) reflecting a more rapid

13

decline with nil FYM than with triennial FYM and no significant overall trend with

annual FYM when averaged over both lime treatments

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Spe

cie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime Year 1 + ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr 1)

a Species richness (total)

2

3

4

5

6

7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

Fig 2 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition at a lowland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control treatment and those that had received lime in year 1

Treatments 1 and 2 were identical (nil input) until 2005

The lowland meadow

Both time and treatment were significant within the ANOVA for total species-richness at

the lowland meadow (Plt0001 and P=0009 respectively and in contrast to the upland

site the treatment x time interaction was significant (P=0012) Averaged over all years

high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was significantly less species-rich than all others

except Treatment 14 (annual FYM at 12 t ha-1

limed in 1999) having declined

progressively between 1999 and 2009 (Fig 2a) with most differences significant at

Plt001 Treatment 14 did not differ significantly overall compared to the corresponding

FYM treatment not limed until 2005 (Tr 4) although these two treatments showed

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 13: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

13

decline with nil FYM than with triennial FYM and no significant overall trend with

annual FYM when averaged over both lime treatments

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

Spe

cie

s p

er

m2

12 t FYMha annual (Tr 4) 24 t FYMha annual (Tr 5) Inor equiv 12 t annual (Tr 9)

Inor equiv 24 t annual (Tr 10) 12 t FYMha 3-yearly (Tr 7) Inor equiv 12 t 3-yearly (Tr 11)

Lime Year 1 + ann FYM (Tr 14) Nil fert + Lime Year 1 (Tr 13) Limed control (Tr 2)

Untreated control (Tr 1)

a Species richness (total)

2

3

4

5

6

7

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

NI

sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

over

d Negative indicator species cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

PI sp

ecie

s

of liv

e c

ove

r

c Positive indicator species cover

Fig 2 Changes 1999-2010 in vegetation composition at a lowland meadow as influenced by

fertilizer and lime treatments (selected treatments) Note that all treatments received lime in year

7 (2005) except for the untreated control treatment and those that had received lime in year 1

Treatments 1 and 2 were identical (nil input) until 2005

The lowland meadow

Both time and treatment were significant within the ANOVA for total species-richness at

the lowland meadow (Plt0001 and P=0009 respectively and in contrast to the upland

site the treatment x time interaction was significant (P=0012) Averaged over all years

high rate annual FYM treatment (Tr 5) was significantly less species-rich than all others

except Treatment 14 (annual FYM at 12 t ha-1

limed in 1999) having declined

progressively between 1999 and 2009 (Fig 2a) with most differences significant at

Plt001 Treatment 14 did not differ significantly overall compared to the corresponding

FYM treatment not limed until 2005 (Tr 4) although these two treatments showed

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 14: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

14

markedly different temporal trends Treatment 14 was less species-rich than others during

the first five years of the experiment but did not change significantly throughout the

whole 12 year period whilst Treatment 4 changed little between 1999 and 2006 but

declined thereafter (Plt001 and Plt0001 for 2009 and 2010 respectively compared to

2006) possibly in response to liming in 2005 However there was no significant overall

effect on total species-richness of liming strategy within the LFF series and no interaction

between liming and either time or FYM application

There were marked differences in temporal trend in species-richness between FYM

treatments and their inorganic counterparts particularly with the high rate annual

treatments (Tr 5 and Tr 10) Whereas species-richness declined more or less continually

throughout under Treatment 5 at least until 2009 (Plt001 for 2004 compared to 1999 and

for both 2009 and 2010 compared to 2004) Treatment 10 declined between 2000 and

2001 (Plt005) and then remained relatively unchanged until 2008 after which it declined

again (2010 Plt005 compared to 2008)

Other treatments within the full treatment series including untreated control (Tr 1) and

limed control (Tr 2) showed no particular temporal trend in the full repeated measures

ANOVA although both the latter treatments showed a dip in species-richness in 2004

(Plt005 compared to both 2003 and 2005)

There was a strong overall effect of form of fertilizer within the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0003) a significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual P=0027) and a not quite significant effect of application rate (high

rateltmedium rate P=0064) but no significant interaction between any of these factors

The time x application frequency interaction was highly significant (Plt0001) species-

richness remained unchanged under triennial application but under annual application

was significantly lower compared to 1999 in each year from 2004 onwards with the

exception of 2006 (Plt005 in 2004 Plt001 in 2005 and 2008 Plt0001 the remainder)

Again with the exception of 2006 differences between triennial and annual application

were significant in each year from 2005 onwards (Plt005 in 2007 Plt001 in 2005 and

2008 Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010)

Both treatment time and their interaction were significant in the full treatment ANOVA

for PI species-richness at the lowland meadow (ie time and treatment both Plt0001

time x treatment P=0006) There was a general decline in PI-richness after 2005 (Fig

2b) with PI species m-2

averaged over all treatments lower from 2007 onwards (Plt0001)

than all years up to 2005 except 2001 Although the initiation of this trend corresponded

with the liming of most treatments in 2005 a similar pattern was shown by treatments

that did not receive this lime application ie the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) the

nil fertilizer treatment limed in 1999 (Tr 13) and the corresponding treatment also

receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15) In all these cases PI-richness showed no significant

difference between years until 2005 but was significantly (Plt001) lower by 2010 than in

2005 Treatment 14 (limed in 1999 plus annual FYM) did not show this pattern but PI

species-richness had been lowest under this treatment in most years between 1999 and

2005 (Fig 2b)

As with total species-richness PI richness declined more or less progressively under

Treatment 5 until 2008 (Plt005 compared to 1999 by 2001 Plt0001 from 2006

onwards) whereas Treatment 4 did not change significantly until 2006 after which it

declined (Plt005 in 2007 compared to 2006 Plt001 thereafter) Both these treatments

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 15: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

15

tended be less rich in PI species than the corresponding inorganic treatment (Trs 9 and

10 respectively) in most years consistently so for Tr 4 compared to Tr 9 but these

differences were not significant in any year nor when averaged over all years There was

however a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer in the FRF series ANOVA

(FYMltinorganic P=0002) and a highly significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialgtannual Plt0001) The time x frequency of application interaction was also

highly significant (Plt0001) Under triennial application PI species per m2 increased

slightly until 2005 (Plt005 compared to 1999) and declined thereafter so that by 2009

levels were significantly lower than in 1999 (Plt001 for 2009 Plt0001 for 2010) By

contrast under annual application PI species m-2

declined progressively until 2009

following a temporary though highly significant (Plt0001) dip in 2000 so that the

difference compared to 1999 was significant in every year from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) from 2005 With the exception of 2003 differences between

triennial and annual application were significant from 2002 onwards and highly

significant (Plt0001) in 2005 and from 2007 to 2010

There was no significant effect other than of time within the LFF treatment series

ANOVA although there was a marginally non-significant time x FYM frequency

interaction (P=0054) This reflected a more rapid decline in PI species-richness under

annual FYM application than with either nil or triennial FYM with the latter two showing

no discernible difference

By contrast with PI species m-2

PI cover percentage (PI) showed no overall treatment

effect within the full treatment ANOVA nor a time x treatment interaction although the

overall effect of time was highly significant (Plt0001) The temporal pattern in PI (Fig

2c) also differed from that shown by PI-richness with PI averaged over all treatments

declining between 1999 and 2005 in three highly significant increments (1999-2000

2000-2002 and 2002-2005 all Plt0001) and increasing again thereafter (2005-2009 and

2009-2010 both Plt0001) There was no significant effect within either the LFF or FRF

treatment series ANOVAs although their was a slight time x frequency of application

effect within the latter (P=0081) PI was slightly higher under annual application than

triennial in each year 1999-2004 after which the reverse was true although differences

were always small

There was no overall effect of treatment on the number of NI species per m2 within the

full treatment range at the lowland meadow (data not shown) but both the overall effect

of time and the time x treatment interaction were significant (Plt0001 and P=0009

respectively) Overall NI species m-2

increased over time from 24 species m-2

in 1999 to

a peak of 42 m-2

in 2008 averaged over all treatments NI species m-2

increased on the

untreated control treatment (Tr 1) from 21 species m-2

in 1999 to 34 species m-2

in 2007

(increase Plt001) then declined to the 1999 value by 2010 The limed (in 2005) control

(Tr 2) showed a somewhat similar pattern though from a slightly higher starting level

(31 species m-2

) and with the increase to 38 species m-2

in 2008 not reaching

significance

These temporal trends in NI species m-2

were much accentuated by annual fertilizer

application particularly by FYM treatments with peak numbers of NI species reaching

52 and 47 species m-2

for Treatments 4 and 5 respectively in 2008 (both Plt0001

compared to 1999) and despite slight declines in both cases remaining significantly

higher in 2010 than in 1999 (both Plt0001) Inorganic counterparts to these treatments

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 16: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

16

showed similar though slightly less marked trends and there was no significant

difference between all four treatments in the peak number reached in 2008 There was no

overall effect of either form of fertilizer or rate of application within the FRF series

ANOVA and only a marginally non-significant effect of frequency of application

(triennialltannual P=0061) Liming in 1999 (Trs 13 14 and 15) also appeared to

accentuate the generally increasing trend although peak numbers in 2008 did not differ

between these treatments and either untreated or limed control in the full treatment range

ANOVA The overall effects of liming regime (1999 or 2005) were not significant within

the LFF treatment series but the faster rate of increase with liming in 1999 was reflected

in a significant time x lime interaction in this analysis (P=0017) The mean number of NI

species m-2

increased very significantly (Plt0001) between 1999 and 2000 following

liming in 1999 with the increment increasing until 2008 whilst on plots un-limed until

2005 NI species m-2

did not increase significantly until 2003 (Plt005) although the

increase compared to 1999 was highly significant (Plt0001) in 2006 2008 and 2010

Nevertheless the differences in rate of increase was at least partly due to a lower 1999

mean for the 1999-limed treatments (170 species m-2

compared to 244 species m-2

difference NS) and although in all years from 2001 onwards mean NI species m-2

was

higher for 1999-limed treatments compared to those not limed until 2005 the difference

was not significant in any year

The contribution of NI species to vegetation cover (NI) showed a very marked

separation between treatments over time at the lowland meadow (Fig 2d) starting from

much lower levels than at the upland meadow (compare with Fig 1d) There were

noticeable differences in temporal trend between annual fertilizer treatments on the one

hand and triennial and nil fertilizer treatments on the other (Fig 2d) The effects of

treatment time and the treatment x time interaction were all highly significant (Plt0001)

in the full treatment range ANOVA The most marked increase in NI occurred with

annual FYM at the high rate (Tr 5) with NI increasing rapidly between 1999 and 2001

(Plt001) and a further highly significant increment between 2004 and 2009 (Plt0001)

(Fig 2d) A similar though less marked trend occurred with annual FYM at the medium

rate (Tr 4) with significant increases between 1999 and 2005 and between 2005 and

2010 (both Plt001) NI also increased markedly with the inorganic treatment

equivalent to Treatment 5 (Tr 10) although the overall rate of increase shown by this

treatment was closer to that shown by Treatment 4 than Treatment 5 There were

significant differences between Treatments 5 and 10 in most years from 2004 onwards

(Plt001 and Plt0001 in 2009 and 2010 respectively)

These effects were reflected in a significant overall effect of form of fertilizer

(FYMgtinorganic P=0008) and highly significant (Plt0001) overall effects of both rate

(high rategtlower rate) and frequency of application (annualgttriennial) within the FRF

series ANOVA and a significant form x rate interaction (P=0043) Mean NI was

highest for high rate annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to all three remaining means) and

lowest for lower rate inorganic (Plt005 compared to high rate inorganic NS compared

to lower rate FYM) Only frequency of application interacted significantly with time

(Plt0001) NI increased moderately under triennial application until 2008 (Plt005 in

2005 compared to 1999 Plt0001 each year 2006-2008) followed by a decline (Plt001

2010 compared to 2008) but with mean NI in 2010 still higher than 1999 (Plt005)

The increasing trend was very much more marked with annual fertilizer application for

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 17: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

17

which there were highly significant (Plt0001) increments between 1999 and 2002 and

between 2002 and 2008 but with no significant increase thereafter Differences between

annual and triennial treatment means were highly significant (Plt0001) from 2003

onwards

There was no significant change in NI over time either under the untreated control

(Tr 1) or the nil fertilizer (Tr 2) treatments in the full treatment ANOVA NI increased

until 2005 on plots limed in 1999 without fertilizer Tr 13 (Plt001 compared to 1999)

and declined slightly but not significantly thereafter Trends were similar with the

treatment limed in 1999 and receiving triennial FYM (Tr 15 ndash not illustrated in Fig 2)

although NI was higher with this treatment than with Tr 13 (Plt005) in both 2005 and

2008 By contrast applying the same rate of FYM annually after liming in 1999 (Tr 14)

caused a more rapid increase with levels by 2005 higher than either Tr 13 (Plt001) or

Tr 4 (Plt005) ndash note that the latter was equivalent to Tr 14 but without lime until 2005

NI declined after 2006 under Tr 14 but continued to increase with Tr 4 with the

difference between these two treatments reversed by 2010 (Plt005)

All main effects and interactions were significant in the LFF treatment series ANOVA

for NI except for lime x FYM frequency and the lime x FYM x time interactions Plots

limed in 1999 supported higher NI levels than those limed in 2005 averaged over the

three FYM frequencies and all years (P=0042) NI increased more rapidly after liming

in 1999 than where liming was delayed until 2005 (P=0033 for time x lime interaction)

with the overall difference due to liming in 1999 highly significant (Plt0001) by 2005

NI declined thereafter on the 1999-limed treatments whilst continuing to increase

following liming in 2005 of previously un-limed treatments both peaking in 2008 at a

very similar level Averaged over lime treatments NI increased much more rapidly

under annual FYM application than under either triennial or nil FYM (P=0002 for the

time x FYM frequency interaction) a highly significant increase had occurred by 2002

with annual FYM (Plt0001 compared to 1999) but increases of similar magnitude were

not reached until 2005 with triennial application and not until 2007 with nil FYM NI

subsequently declined under the latter two FYM regimes but not with annual FYM so

that by 2010 NI was significantly higher with annual FYM than with either triennial or

nil FYM (Plt0001) but with only a small non-significant difference between the latter

two treatments

TREATMENT EFFECTS AFTER 12 YEARS OF APPLICATION

The effects of all treatments on the five key variables at each site in 2010 are shown in

Table S20 with treatments differing significantly (Plt005) from the limed control

treatment (Tr 2) highlighted for each variable Treatment effects in 2010 are not

described in detail here but the modeled responses of total species-richness and of

richness of PI species in 2010 to the mean amounts of N and P applied per year averaged

over 1999-2010 are described below

Relationships with the amounts of fertilizer applied

The effect of neither rate nor frequency of application was significant in any of the

REML models for either total species-richness or PI species-richness at either site when

the amount of N or P applied ha-1

year-1

was included The effect of form of fertilizer was

still significant in most models however either as a main effect or in interaction with the

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 18: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

18

squared term for the relevant nutrient (ie N2 or P

2) Since the mean amounts of N and P

applied were completely correlated across treatment N and P models usually showed

similar main effects although the Form term was usually more significant in N than P

models due to the smaller discrepancies between FYM and inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo

treatments in the amount of N applied compared to P (see Table 2) Attention is focussed

primarily on P models here since P availability was considered to be the main limiting

element at both sites (see Discussion)

The best fit model for species-richness in the upland meadow showed both a marked

non-linear response to fertilizer application (particularly FYM) and a marked difference

in response between FYM and inorganic treatments (Fig 3a)The main effect of form of

fertilizer was not significant but a model that included Form nested within the squared

term (P2) was highly significant (Plt0001) with each term significant in the model

(P=0010 Plt0001 and P=0024 for P P2 and P

2 x Form respectively and Plt0001 for

the constant) (see Fig 3a for formula)

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

Annual FYM Annual Inorganic Triennial FYM

Triennial inorganic Nil fertilizer

c Total species-richness

SR = 216 - 440 lognP + x

x = 77 for inorganic x = 51 for FYM

Lowland meadowUpland meadow

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

Sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

2

3

4

5

6

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

kg P ha-1 year-1

PI specie

s p

er

m2

PIn = 475 - 0107P

d Positive indicator species richness

a Total species-richness

SR = 257 + 0483 P - 0027 P2 ndash x P2

x = 0 for inorganic x = 0011 for FYM

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 5 10 15 20

kg P ha-1

year-1

PI sp

ecie

s p

er

m2

b Positive indicator species richness

PIn = 733 - 0113 P +x

x = 085 for inorganic x = 0 23 for FYM

Fig 3 Relationships between the amount of P applied per year (mean of 1999-2010) as either

inorganic fertilizer or as FYM and species-richness (a and c) and the number of positive

indicator species per m2 (b and d) The lines or curves on each graph were fitted by REML with P

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 19: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

19

as a continuous explanatory variable and with form of fertilizer as a factor Error bars are

plusmnstandard errors of treatment means

The overall relationship between PI species-richness and nutrient input was linear at the

upland meadow (Fig 3b) The addition of the Form term gave a marginally non-

significant improvement to the P model (P=0081) but this term was significant in the N

model (P=0039) The influence of nutrient amount (N or P) was highly significant in

both models (both Plt0001) but with no significant interaction with form of fertilizer

Inorganic treatments were slightly more rich in PI species at a given level of N or P input

than FYM (by 075 and 062 PI species per m2 according to the N and P models

respectively) In both models the predicted intercept values for inorganic fertilizers were

somewhat higher than the actual limed control mean reflecting a lack of response to

inorganic fertilizer levels equivalent to up to about 8 -10 kg P ha-1

year-1

relative to nil

fertilizer

Species-richness at the lowland meadow (Fig 3c) was reduced both by FYM and

inorganic treatments in a non-linear fashion best described by a linear relationship against

lognP (or lognN) over the range of fertilizer treatments (but not nil fertilizer) The effect

of form of fertilizer was very strong in each model (Plt0001) but there was no significant

interaction so that both models predicted a constant difference between inorganic and

FYM treatments (+26 and +39 species m-2

for inorganic fertilizer compared to FYM in

P and N models respectively) However in contrast to the polynomial response at the

upland meadow the logarithmic relationship at the lowland site did not adequately

describe the response at the lowest input levels compared to nil fertilizer which

suggested a humped pattern with the lowest fertilizer values at its peak (see Fig 3c) A

simple second or third order polynomial response was inadequate to describe this overall

relationship but no further attempt was made to find a more complex model

The effect of form of fertiliser was not significant (P=0111) in the P model for PI

species m-2

at the lowland meadow but was significant in the N model (P=0014) with

the overall linear response to the amount applied highly significant (Plt0001) in both

models (Fig 3d) The N model predicted higher PI-richness with inorganic treatments

than with FYM with an overall difference of 062 PI species m-2

These results suggest that treatments delivering up to about 10 kg P ha-1

year-1

(equivalent to 11-12 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) were consistent with maintenance of species

diversity at the upland meadow with some indication that lower rates were beneficial

Only about 3 kg P ha-1

year-1

applied as FYM (equivalent to about 4 t FYM ha-1

year-1

) or

5-6 kg P ha-1

year-1

as inorganic fertilizer were sustainable at the lowland site

Soil microbial community responses

Fertilizer treatments had no effect on total fungal and bacterial PLFArsquos or on the ratio of

fungalbacterial PLFA at either site in 2010 (Tables S21 and S22) Likewise no

treatment effects on these variables were detected in previous years (data not presented)

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 20: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

20

Discussion

PLANT COMMUNITY AND SOIL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITES

Several other sources of data from within the UK (eg Rodwell 1992 Gibson 1996

1997 Critchley et al 2002ab Smith et al 2003) allow the meadows studied here and

the treatment effects occurring at them to be put into a national context in terms of plant

community and soil characteristics The similarities between these meadows and lowland

oceanic and upland meadows in Europe (Rodwell et al 2007) mean that these results

should have wide applicability outside the UK

Plant communities

Ordination of the vegetation composition in 2007 in the context of the NVC (RA

Sanderson unpublished) showed most treatments at the upland meadow to have retained

a close affinity to the MG3b (Briza media) NVC sub-community with the notable

exception of the high rate (24 t ha-1

year-1

) annual FYM which had moved to a position

intermediate between MG3a and MG3b the generally less species-rich Bromus

hordeaceus ssp hordeaceus sub-community (Rodwell 1992) Species-richness on the

latter treatment had declined to 18 species per m2 by 2007 a level more typical of MG6

(Lolium perenne-Cynosurus cristatus grassland) (Critchley et al 2002a) Although the

vegetation had recovered to a small extent to 20 species per m2 by 2010 under this

treatment it was still markedly less species-rich than others and with a substantially

higher aggregate cover of negative indicator species By contrast the quality of

vegetation under other fertilizer treatments - particularly those incorporating lower

nutrient inputs than used in the past (12 t ha-1

applied annually) - had improved in terms

of increased number and cover of positive indicator species and a decline in the aggregate

cover of negative indicator species

Unfertilized treatments at the lowland meadow contained about 22-24 species per m2

between 1999 and 2007 the higher value being fairly typical of MG5 grassland (Gibson

1996 1997 Critchley et al 2002a Species-richness declined thereafter under most

treatments including limed control and untreated control treatments with the declines

most noticeable in terms of positive indicator species The reasons for this general decline

are not clear although a series of later hay harvests during this period is the probable

cause (Kirkham amp Tallowin 1995) The decline in total species-richness under the high

rate annual FYM treatment (to 133 species m-2

in 2009) was even more marked than at

the upland meadow with this level approaching the average for MG7 (Lolium perenne-

dominated) grasslands (118 species m-2

) in the ESA survey (Critchley et al 2002a)

The weighted Ellenberg fertility score is useful for characterizing vegetation in relation

to variations in soil fertility and nutrient inputs (Smith et al 2003 Kirkham et al 2008

The mean scores for the upland and lowland meadows in 1999 were 447 and 400

respectively with the upland meadow mean falling within the 433-467 range of target

values for the MG3b community identified by Smith et al (2003) Medium and high rate

(12 and 24 t ha-1

) annual FYM treatments at the upland meadow exceeded this target

range in 2010 although the former only marginally so at 472 (509 for the high rate)

whereas both these treatments increased the fertility scores markedly at the lowland

meadow (486 and 520 respectively in 2010) All other treatments at the upland meadow

fell within the 433-467 MG3 target range in 2010 with the exception of the inorganic

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 21: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

21

equivalent to high rate FYM (480) Values for fertilizer treatments were generally higher

at the lowland meadow than at the upland one although the opposite was true for

unfertilized vegetation These differences closely reflect the corresponding differences

between sites in the percentage contribution to vegetation cover of negative indicator

species (NI) with which fertility scores were closely correlated

Soil chemical properties

Soil pH was low at both sites in 1999 (518 and 501 at upland and lowland meadows

respectively) compared to typical mean values for ESA MG3 and MG5 grasslands of 64

SDplusmn089 and 62 SDplusmn100 respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) in each case falling

outside the range represented by plusmn one standard deviation (SD) about the ESA mean All

treatments except untreated controls fell within this range following liming in 1999

andor 2005 most exceeding the target of 60 This target corresponds to the mean pH in

3260 English grassland sites currently candidate for an agri-environment agreement or

within existing agreements (Natural England (NE) unpublished) although higher than

the average of 54 for MG5a grasslands in Wales (Stevens et al 2010)

Oslashlsen extractable soil P at both sites in 1999 was within the range associated with

maximal species-richness in ESA grasslands of 4-15 mg l-1

(Critchley et al 2002a) and

the mean value at the upland meadow (550 mg l-1

) was within the SD range typical of

MG3 grasslands though somewhat below the mean (77 plusmn449 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al

2002b) Soil P levels were considerably lower at the lowland meadow (512 mg l-1

) than

typical values for ESA MG5 grasslands (96 plusmn449 mg l-1

) and low at both sites

compared to the mean for the NE agri-environment scheme database of 135 mg l-1

(although it should be noted that this database includes candidate sites for biodiversity

restoration as well as unimproved grasslands)

The significance of plant available soil P for vegetation response to fertilizers is

discussed later

Soil organic matter (measured by loss on ignition) was lower at the lowland meadow

(90) than at the upland one (172) although within typical ranges for MG5 (106

plusmn427) and MG3 (146 plusmn422) communities respectively (Critchley et al 2002b) Total

soil nitrogen values differed between sites correspondingly (034 and 065 at lowland

and upland sites respectively) with these values also low compared to values of 067

plusmn0299 for MG5 and 090 plusmn0425 for MG3 ESA grasslands

Exchangeable soil K values were high at both sites (at 197 and 175 mg l-1

for upland

and lowland meadows respectively) compared to MG3 (128 plusmn640) and MG5 (135 plusmn390

mg l-1

) ESA grasslands and compared to sites within the NE database (135 mg l-1

) and

were more typical of MG6 grasslands (164 plusmn820 mg l-1

) (Critchley et al 2002b)

Soil K levels in 2010 were noticeably raised at both sites by annual FYM treatments at

the medium and high rates and by the inorganic counterparts to these treatments (see

Supporting Information Tables S1 and S2) A similar effect was noticeable with Oslashlsen P

levels though mainly at the higher annual FYM rate but no such effect was noticeable

for soil organic matter (LOI) soil carbon or total soil N Nevertheless even with the

high rate FYM treatment extractable soil P levels were still lower at the lowland meadow

in 2010 than the mean for MG5 grasslands and still well within the range for MG3 at the

upland meadow whilst exchangeable K at both sites was within the range more typical of

improved (MG7) grasslands (213 plusmn1197 mg l-1

Critchley et al 2002b)

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 22: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

22

Even at the upland meadow K availability in 2010 would be considered at least

moderate in agronomic terms on all treatments ie soil index 1 (61-120 mg K l-1

)

according to the classification system used in the UK (Anon 2010) and satisfactory on

some (ie index 2 and 3 121-240 and 241-400 mg K l-1

respectively whilst soil K

indices were 2 or 3 under all treatments at the lowland meadow in 2010 including

untreated controls By contrast soil P was still well within the deficient category (index

0 0-9 mg P l-1

) under all treatments at both sites in 2010 with the exception of the high

rate FYM treatment at the upland meadow which fell just within the index 1 (moderate)

range (10-15 mg P l-1

)

Soil microbial communities

The fungal-to-bacterial PLFA ratio (FBR) values which ranged from 006 to 011

suggest that the microbial communities of both sites were fungal-dominated which is

typical of traditionally managed species-rich grasslands Other studies have confirmed

that grassland microbial soil communities are strongly affected by inorganic nitrogen

enrichment with fertilizer addition often reducing the FBR and resulting in a shift to

bacterial dominance (Bardgett amp McAlister 1999 Donnison et al 2000ab Smith et al

2008) The lack of response in this study however most likely reflects the low amounts

of nutrients added to soil in fertilizers but also potentially the high resistance of fungal-

dominated microbial communities of species-rich grasslands to environmental changes

(Gordon Haygarth amp Bardgett 2008)

SIGNIFICANCE OF BETWEEN-SITE DIFFERENCES FOR RESILIENCE TO FERTILITY INPUTS

Whilst the lighter texture and lower organic matter content of soils at the lowland site

might imply a higher potential for nutrient leaching this would probably be outweighed

by the higher rainfall at the upland site and in terms of N availability by the much higher

levels of N deposition ie c 33 kg N ha-1

year-1

compared to c 21 kg N ha-1

year-1

for

the lowland site (source the Air Pollution Information System at wwwapisacuk)

Probably of more significance the lowland meadow - with lower rainfall lower

atmospheric N input and lower soil organic matter (and thus lower soil water holding

capacity) - was a more stressed environment than the upland meadow This combined

with a history of no fertilizer or lime inputs for at least 20 years was apparently reflected

in a grassland system less resilient to fertilizer inputs than the upland meadow

FREQUENCY AND RATE OF APPLICATION

Not surprisingly perhaps the influence of rate of application of fertilizers on both

species-richness and the richness of positive indicator species were shown to be entirely a

function of the mean amount of nutrients added per year The same was true of frequency

of application An earlier analysis of 2005 data from these sites suggested a positive

benefit of triennial application compared to annual application of correspondingly lower

amounts (Kirkham et al 2008) However in contrast to the period reported here which

encompassed a further two completed three-year cycles (including that started in 2005)

in the earlier analysis the last instalment of the triennial treatment had been applied only

about a month before the 2005 botanical assessment and will have contributed little to the

effects of the treatment in that year More subtle effects of application frequency may

have occurred however at the plant community or individual plant species level that

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 23: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

23

were not shown by the composite variables analysed and there might also be agronomic

or logistical advantages of intermittent fertilizer application beyond the scope of

discussion here

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FYM AND INORGANIC FERTILIZERS

The lesser effect of inorganic fertilizer on vegetation compared to FYM was reported

previously (Kirkham et al 2008) However the subsequent revision made in 2007 of

estimates of N and P availability from FYM inorganic lsquoequivalentrsquo treatments were now

considered to have been supplying substantially less P in particular than was estimated

for their FYM counterparts These discrepancies were taken into account in the REML

modelling approach but although differences in response between the two forms of

fertilizer were much reduced a difference remained in most cases These differentials

might have narrowed further after a longer time period had elapsed following the

revisions to the amounts of N and P applied in inorganic treatments particularly as

discrepancies in the amount of P applied were both larger and most likely of more

significance than those in N (see discussion below) Furthermore although some residual

availability from FYM of both N and P were allowed for in the revised estimates this

may not have fully accounted for cumulative effects of these residues and for differences

between FYM and inorganic fertilizers in this respect

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PHOSPHORUS AVAILABILITY

The very low underlying availability of soil P at both sites relative to N and K makes it

very likely that P was limiting relative to the other two macro-nutrients at most if not all

levels of fertilizer application This hypothesis is supported by analyses of 2005 data

from the lowland meadow and from an adjacent agriculturally-improved meadow (Bush)

incorporating a wider range of treatments than those reported here and which provided

some variation in the ratios between the amounts of N P and K applied (Kirkham et al

2007) Proprietary organic fertilizers delivering similar amounts of N to the high rate

FYM treatment but containing less P and K had relatively little effect on vegetation and

regression analyses of data across all treatments suggested a much stronger influence of P

than of N at both unimproved and improved lowland meadows the latter also having a

low soil P status in 1999 (56 mg Oslashlsen extractable P l-1

) Other experimental and survey

evidence shows that P enrichment is generally a more important driver of species-loss

and reductions in species-diversity from semi-natural grasslands than N enrichment

(Kirkham et al 1996 Ceulemans et al 2011) and that maximum species-richness in

grasslands is confined to a very narrow band of low soil P availability (Janssens et al

1998 Critchley et al 2002a) Many more endangered species persist under P-limited

than under N-limited conditions (Wassen et al 2005)

These studies do not demonstrate a causal link but species that are particularly adapted

to low P availability are characteristically deep-rooted herbs and other species with low

relative growth rates (Grime amp Hunt 1975) Higher susceptibility to elevated P is

associated with stress-tolerance low stature and association with arbuscular mycorrhizae

(Ceulemans et al 2011) the latter enhancing their access to soil P resources (van der

Heijden et al 1998) These properties apparently allow them to co-exist in relatively

large numbers under low P availability along with smaller numbers of potentially more

competitive species whose dominance is restrained by the nutrient-poor conditions

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 24: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

24

It is important to note that the amounts of N applied in FYM were relatively small

compared to amounts used in other fertilizer experiments (eg Mountford et al 1993

Kirkham et al 1996 Silvertown et al 2006) but the proportions of P and K relative to

N in FYM were much higher - both in comparison with treatments applied in these earlier

experiments and with most commercial compound fertilizers The evidence suggests that

in this context at least as much attention should be focussed upon the amount of P

applied in relation to the initial P status of the soil as on the amount of N being applied

RESPONSE TO LIME

Liming alone had little or no detrimental effect on vegetation at either site but apparently

reduced vegetation quality when applied in conjunction with annual FYM at the lowland

meadow The latter effect was not evident at the upland meadow and probably reflects

differences between sites in past management It is debateable whether the plant

community at the lowland meadow would eventually acclimatise to this regime and even

a 12-year period is insufficient to gauge this partly because soil pH did not decline

rapidly enough at the lowland meadow after liming in 1999 to justify repetition of the

treatment Further evidence of the damaging effect of liming in conjunction with annual

FYM application was provided by a decline in vegetation quality on the corresponding

previously un-limed FYM treatment following liming in 2005 although this effect was

masked somewhat by a general trend of decline after 2005 which included the untreated

control treatment By contrast there was no evidence of any detrimental effect of lime in

conjunction with triennial FYM application

Rationale behind the liming policy

A decision was made in 2005 to treat liming as a background management for all

fertilizer treatments at both sites whilst retaining (or in the case of the upland meadow

establishing) a non-limed unfertilised treatment This policy was adopted on the basis that

use of lime is widespread in hay meadows and occasional liming can be considered

traditional management (Tallowin 1998 Walsh Peel amp Jefferson 2011) It is unlikely

that either inorganic fertilizers or FYM would be used in practice without occasional

liming to maintain soil pH at levels which would allow sufficient response to these inputs

to justify their use on agronomic grounds To forego this strategy at the upland meadow

would have been doubly unjustifiable in view of the high quality of the plant community

there and the known history of occasional liming

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SEMI-NATURAL

MEADOWS

These results show that levels of annual FYM application equivalent to those already in

use at the upland meadow (ie 12 tonnes of FYM per hectare) are likely to be

ecologically sustainable in the long term within similar MG3 meadows but that higher

rates may not be and amounts as high as 24 t ha-1

per year almost certainly are not

sustainable within meadows comparable to either of those in this study Moreover whilst

past inputs appear to be sustainable at the upland meadow reductions in the level of

inputs were beneficial

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 25: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

25

Occasional liming to raise soil pH to 60 appeared to be consistent with maintaining

vegetation quality within MG3 plant communities of which the upland meadow is

typical

It was less easy to define with any certainty safe levels of fertilizer input at the lowland

meadow than at the upland one However FYM inputs equivalent to up 12 tonnes ha-1

triennialy or about 4 tonnes annually or levels of inorganic fertilizer equivalent in N P

and K content to these levels appeared to be sustainable for the maintenance of a high

nature value meadow at the lowland site These levels are slightly lower than the le6

tonnes FYM ha-1

year-1

suggested by 1999-2005 results (Kirkham et al 2008) ie for a

period five years less than that reported here and it is possible that even these lower

levels may turn out to be unsustainable in the longer term However as noted above

defining such trends has been hampered somewhat by an apparent small decline in

vegetation quality over recent years apparently independent of treatments but possibly

due to a succession of late harvests in later years

This study shows no evidence to suggest that inorganic fertilizers supplying equivalent

amounts of N P and K to ecologically-sustainable levels of FYM could not be substituted

for these FYM treatments at either site

Liming either alone or in conjunction with intermittent FYM application equivalent to

the levels quoted above appeared to be sustainable at the lowland meadow and liming

showed no adverse effect at the upland site either alone or in interaction with fertilizers

The negative effects of fairly moderate annual inputs of FYM to the lowland meadow

and the apparent interaction with liming may reflect historic adaptation of vegetation to

the absence of recent inputs of lime or fertilizer and the consequent low levels of soil pH

phosphorus and total nitrogen or may more closely reflect site-specific factors such as

soil texture and annual rainfall It would be unwise therefore to extrapolate directly the

results of this study to MG5 meadows with a more recent history of either FYM or lime

use or conversely to sites where this history is unknown Nevertheless at sites

comparable in botanical composition and soil status to the lowland meadow the low

fertilizer inputs quoted above are likely to be ecologically sustainable and may also bring

about a gradual adaptation of the vegetation to slightly higher fertility levels in the longer

term

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Helen Adamson Deborah Beaumont John Fowbert Jo Goodyear Anna

Gundrey Emma Pilgrim Ken Milner Anne Moon Steven Shepherd Roger Smith Julia

Tallowin James Towers Jan Winder and Barry Wright for carrying out botanical assessments

and Helen Adamson Gail Bennett Jo Goodyear and other staff from IGER (now Rothamsted

Research North Wyke) and ADAS for applying treatments Mike Burke and Alison Mole were

responsible for data management The project was conceived supervised and funded by the

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs English Nature (now Natural England) and

the Countryside Council for Wales We would like to acknowledge the contributions made by

Tim Blackstock Val Brown Richard Brand-Hardy Andrew Cooke Richard Jefferson Steve

Peel Carrie Rimes Stuart Smith and the late David Stevens We are grateful to Mr and Mrs Joe

Winder Tim Winder and the Gwent Wildlife Trust for provision of sites and for cooperation and

assistance with field operations

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 26: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

26

References

Allen SE (1974) Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials Blackwell Oxford UK

Anon (2010) Fertilizer Manual (RB 209) 8th Edition Her Majestyrsquos Stationery Office London

Bakker JP (1989) Nature Management by Grazing and Cutting Geobotany Series No 14

Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht

Berendse F Oomes MJM Altena HJ amp Elberse W Th (1992) Experiments on the

restoration of species-rich meadows in the Netherlands Biological Conservation 62 59-65

Bardgett R D amp McAlister E (1999) The measurement of soil fungalbacterial biomass ratios

as an indicator of ecosystem self-regulation in temperate meadow grasslands Biology and

Fertility of Soils 29 282-290

Bardgett R D Hobbs P J amp Frostegaringrd A (1996) Changes in soil fungalbacterial biomass

ratios following reductions in the intensity of management of an upland grassland Biology

and Fertility of Soils 22 261-264

Blackstock TH Rimes CA Stevens DP Jefferson RG Robertson HJ Mackintosh J amp

Hopkins JJ (1999) The extent of semi-natural grassland communities in lowland England

and Wales a review of conservation surveys 1978-96 Grass and Forage Science 54 1-18

Ceulemans T Merckx R Hens M amp Honnay O (2011) A trat-based analysis of the role of

phosphorous vs nitrogen enrichment in plant species loss across North-west Europen

grasslands Journal of Applied Ecology 48 1155-1163

Chambers BJ Lord EI Nicholson FA amp Smith KA (1999) Predicting nitrogen availability

and losses following application of manures to arable land MANNER Soil Use and

Management 15 137-143

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Bhogal A Rose S C amp Sanderson R A

(2002a) Plant species-richness functional type and soil properties in grasslands and allied

vegetation in English Environmentally Sensitive Areas Grass Forage Science 57 82-92

Critchley C N R Chambers B J Fowbert JA Sanderson R A Bhogal A amp Rose S C (

2002b) Association between lowland grassland plant communities and soil properties

Biological Conservation 105 199-215

Crofts A amp Jefferson RG (1999) The Lowland Grassland Management Handbook 2nd edn

English NatureThe Wildlife Trusts Peterborough

Donnison L M Griffith G S amp Bardgett R D (2000a) Determinants of fungal growth and

activity in botanically diverse haymeadows effects of litter type and fertilizer additions Soil

Biology and Biochemistry 32 289-294

Donnison L M Griffith G S Hedger J Hobbs P J amp Bardgett R D (2000b) Management

influences on soil microbial communities and their function in botanically diverse

haymeadows of northern England and Wales Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32 253-263

Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation Ecology of Central Europe Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Federle T W (1986) Microbial distribution in soil ndash new techniques Perspectives in microbial

ecology pp 493-498 (eds F Megusar amp M Ganter) Slovene Society for Microbiology

Ljubljana Slovenia

Frostegaringrd A amp Baringaringth E (1996) The use of phospholipid fatty analysis to estimate bacterial

and fungal biomass in soil Biology and Fertility of Soils 22 59-65

Frostegaringrd A Tunlid A amp Baringaringth E (1993) Phospholipid fatty acid composition biomass and

activity of microbial communities from two soil types experimentally exposed to different

heavy metals Applied Environmental Microbiology 59 3605-3617

Fuller RM (1987) The changing extent and conservation interest of lowland grasslands in

England and Wales a review of grassland surveys 1930-1984 Biological Conservation 40

281-300

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 27: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

27

Galwey NW (2006) Introduction to Mixed Modelling Beyond Regression and Analysis of

Variance John Wiley amp Sons Ltd Chichester

Genstat 5 Committee (1997) Genstat for Windows Command Language Manual 3rd edn

Numerical Algorithms Group Oxford

Gibson CWD (1996) The effects of horse grazing on species-rich grasslands English Nature

Research Report No 164 English Nature Peterborough

Gibson CWD (1997) The effects of horse and cattle grazing on English species-rich grasslands

English Nature Research Report No 210 English Nature Peterborough

Gordon H Haygarth PM amp Bardgett RD (2008) Drying and rewetting effects on soil

microbial community composition and nutrient leaching Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40

302-311

Goulson D Hanley ME Darvill B Ellis JS amp Knight ME (2005) Causes of rarity in

bumblebees Biological Conservation 122 1-8

Grime JP amp Hunt R (1975) Relative growth rate its range and adaptive significance in a local

flora Journal of Ecology 63 393-422

Hill MO Mountford JO Roy DB Bunce RGH 1999 Ellenbergs indicator values for

British plants ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annexe HMSO Norwich

Janssens F Peeters A Tallowin JRB Bakker JP Bekker RM Verweij GL Fillat F amp

Oomes MJM (1998) Relationship between soil chemical factors and grassland diversity

Plant and Soil 202 68-78

Jefferson RG (2005) The conservation management of upland hay meadows in Britain a

review Grass and Forage Science 60 322-331

Kirkham FW amp Tallowin JRB (1995) The influence of cutting date and previous fertilizer

treatment on the productivity and botanical composition of species-rich hay meadows on the

Somerset Levels Grass and Forage Science 50 365-377

Kirkham FW Mountford JO amp Wilkins RJ (1996) The effects of nitrogen potassium and

phosphorus addition on the vegetation of a Somerset peat moor under cutting management

Journal of Applied Ecology 33 1013-1029

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Hoppeacute GM amp Goodyear J (2002) Role of

organic fertilizers in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands II ndash Botanical

studies Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 153-157 Proceedings of British Grassland

Society Occasional Symposium No 36 British Grassland Society Reading UK

Kirkham FW Tallowin JRB Sanderson RA Bhogal A Chambers BJ amp Stevens DP

(2008) The impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers and lime on the species-richness and

plant functional characteristics of hay meadow communities Biological Conservation 141

1411-1427

MAFF (1986) Analysis of Agricultural Materials (RB427) HMSO London UK

Mountford JO Lakhani K amp Kirkham FW (1993) Experimental assessment of the effects of

nitrogen addition under hay cutting and aftermath grazing on the vegetation of hay meadows

on a Somerset peat moor Journal of Applied Ecology 30 321-332

Myklestad Aring amp Saeligtersdal M (2004) The importance of traditional meadow management

techniques for conservation of vascular plant species richness in Norway Biological

Conservation 118 133-139

Nicholson F Rollett AJ Bhogal A Lord E Thorman RE Williams JR Smith KA

Misselbrook TH Chadwick DR amp Chambers BJ (2010) MANNER-NPK Climate Water

and Soil Science Policy and Practice (eds K Crichton amp R Audsley) pp 328-333

Proceedings of the SA and SEPA biennial conference Macaulay Land Use Research Institute

Aberdeen UK

Ormerod SJ 2003 Restoration in applied ecology Journal of Ecology 40 44-50

Ratcliffe DA (ed) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review (Two volumes) Cambridge University

Press Cambridge

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 28: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

28

Ratcliffe DA (1984) Post-mediaeval and recent changes in British vegetation the culmination

of human influence New Phytologist 98 73-100

Rich TCG amp Woodruff ER (1996) Changes in the vascular plant floras of England and

Scotland between 1930-60 and 1987-88 the BSBI monitoring scheme Biological

Conservation 75 217-229

Robertson HJamp Jefferson RG (2000) Monitoring the condition of lowland grassland SSSIs

I English Naturersquos rapid assessment method English Nature Research Report No315

English Nature Peterborough

Rodwell JS (ed) (1992) British Plant Communities Volume 3 Grasslands and montane

Communities Cambridge University Press Cambridge

Rodwell JS Morgan V Jefferson RG amp Moss D (2007) The European context of British

lowland grasslands Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No 394 JNCC

Peterborough

Silvertown J Poulton P Johnston E Edwards G Heard M amp Biss PM (2006) The Park

Grass Experiment 1856-2006 Its contribution to ecology Journal of Ecology 94 801-814

Simpson NA amp Jefferson RG (1996) Use of Farmyard Manure on Semi-natural (Meadow)

Grassland English Nature Research Report No 150 English Nature Peterborough

Smith KA Chalmers AG Chambers BJ amp Christie P (1998) Organic manure phosphorus

accumulation mobility and management Soil Use and Management 14 154-159

Smith RS (1988) Farming and conservation of traditional meadowland in the Pennine Dales

Environmentally Sensitive Area Ecological Change in the Uplands (eds) MB Usher amp

DBA Thompson British Ecological Society Special Publication No 7 Blackwell Scientific

Publications Oxford pp 183-199

Smith RS amp Jones L (1991) The phenology of mesotrophic grassland in the Pennine Dales

Northern England historic hay cutting dates vegetation variation and plant species

phenologies Journal of Applied Ecology 28 42-59

Smith RS amp Rushton SP (1994) The effects of grazing management on the vegetation of

mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in Northern England Journal of Applied Ecology 31 13-24

Smith RS Buckingham H Bullard MJ Shiel RS amp Younger A (1996) The conservation

management of mesotrophic (meadow) grassland in northern England I Effects of grazing

cutting date and fertilizer on the vegetation of a traditionally managed sward Grass and

Forage Science 51 278-291

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Rolph G Hobbs PJ

Peacock S 2003 Soil microbial community fertility vegetation and diversity as targets in

the restoration management of a meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology 40 51-64

Smith RS Shiel RS Bardgett RD Millward D Corkhill P Evans P Quirk H Hobbs

PJ amp Kometa ST (2008) Long-term change in vegetation and soil microbial communities

during the phased restoration of traditional meadow grassland Journal of Applied Ecology

45 670-679

Stace CA (2010) New Flora of the British Isles 3rd edn Cambridge University Press

Cambridge

Stevens DP Smith SLN Blackstock TH Bosanquet SDS amp Stevens JP (2010)

Grasslands of Wales a survey of lowland species- rich grasslands 1987ndash2004 University of

Wales Cardiff Press Cardiff

Tallowin JRB (1998) Use and effects of lime application on semi-natural grasslands in Britain

Countryside Council for Wales Contract Science Report No 261 Countryside Council for

Wales Bangor

Tallowin JRB Kirkham FW Goodyear J amp Hoppeacute GM (2002) Role of organic fertilizers

in the sustainable management of semi-natural grasslands I ndash Agronomic studies

Conservation Pays (ed J Frame) pp 149-152 BGS Occasional Symposium No 36 British

Grassland Society Reading

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 29: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

29

Van der Heijden MGA Klironomos JN Ursic M Moutoglis P Streitwolfe-Engel R

Boller T Wiemken A amp Saunders IR (1998) Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant

diversity ecosystem variability and productivity Nature 396 69-72

Walsh G Peel S amp Jefferson R (2011) The use of lime on semi-natural grassland in agri-

environment schemes Natural England Technical Information Note TIN 045 Natural

England Available at httpnaturalenglandetraderstorescom NaturalEnglandShopTIN045

Wassen MJ Venterink HO Lapshina ED Tannenberger F (2005) Endangered species

persist under phosphorus limitation Nature 437 547-550

Welham SJ amp Thompson R (1997) Likelihood ratio tests for fixed model terms using residual

maximum likelihood Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 59 701-714

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 30: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

30

Supporting Information

SPECIES RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORAL TRENDS IN PI AND NI SPECIES

The upland meadow

The small but significant (Plt005) overall decline in PI species-richness between 1999

and 2000 (Fig 1b) was largely attributable to small declines in the abundance of

Alchemilla glabra and Euphrasia officinalis agg both of which subsequently increased

to levels equivalent to or higher than 1999 levels (data for individual species not

presented) This initial decline was not reflected in PI which increased significantly

between most years including 1999 and 2000 (Plt0001) The marked progressive overall

increase in PI (from 14 of live cover in 1999 to 51 in 2010 back-transformed

means) was mainly attributable to increases in Conopodium majus across the experiment

as a whole and to increases in Leontodon hispidus in nil and low input treatments in

particular with the latter species declining under annual high rate FYM (Tr 5) Both

Centaurea nigra and Geranium sylvaticum increased in general including under Tr 5

although G sylvaticum was rather unevenly distributed among treatments Some of the

overall increase in PI under Tr 5 was attributable to Filipendula ulmaria which was

recorded on only one plot throughout the whole period but increased on this plot from

less than 2 of live cover in 1999 to 18 in 2010

Declines in NI were largely attributable to diminishing cover of Holcus lanatus -

which accounted for 10-15 of vegetation cover in 1999 - and to a lesser extent Rumex

acetosa which occupied 3-5 of cover initially Holcus also declined under Tr 5 but this

was at least matched by increases in Poa trivialis with R acetosa with Heracleum

sphondylium also increasing and a noticeable increase in Lolium perenne in 2007-2009

Similar trends occurred with both Trs 4 and 14 but with smaller increases in the latter

four species and no increase in P trivialis with Tr 14 this species remaining at low

levels with all treatments where lime was applied in 1999 (Trs 13-15)

The lowland meadow

Temporal trends in PI were not attributable to any one species but reflect the combined

effect of differing patterns in several species Centaurea nigra cover followed a

somewhat similar trend to the overall one though less marked Leontodon hispidus

declined progressively over the whole period with most treatments from initial levels of

3-20 of vegetation cover though not with the untreated control treatment (Tr 1) and

only to a small extent on the limed control (Tr 2) Rhinanthus minor declined steeply

from 2-8 in 1999 to lt15 in 2001 but recovered to initial levels between 2008 and

2010

Lathyrus pratensis remained at very low levels overall (lt05) until 2005 then rose to

levels of up to 15 of the vegetation on fertilized plots by 2010 Lotus corniculatus

accounted for 4-15 of vegetation cover initially declining to levels averaging about 2

in 2001-2002 and increasing slightly to 2-8 from 2005 onwards

Most initial increases in NI were attributable to increases in H lanatus but under both

FYM and inorganic treatments this species was progressively replaced by P trivialis

mainly after 2005 The interchange between these two species was not clearly related to

liming in 2005 since it also occurred on Tr 14 plots (limed in 1999) although this was

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 31: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

31

not evident until 2004 Trifolium repens was prominent on most plots between 2001 and

2007 particularly with Tr 13 (nil fertilizer limed in 1999) though not with Tr5 This

species increased under Tr 4 initially but was replaced between 2005 and 2007 by

increases in Holcus before the latter declined in favour of P trivialis

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 32: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

32

Table S1 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the upland meadow Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and Treatments 2-12 received

lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 540 046 510 1487 57 950 1000 1112

2 Limed (in 2005) control 590 049 500 1333 34 997 830 1500

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 630 060 500 1500 47 1167 897 1774

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 617 060 522 1392 50 1432 1040 1657

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 633 061 543 1523 103 1933 1050 1778

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 623 060 527 1480 31 1117 867 1718

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 607 044 453 1353 57 830 840 1570

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 623 052 500 1357 47 923 837 1649

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 593 059 507 1463 63 1470 780 1453

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 059 497 1340 67 2603 730 1513

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 620 054 487 1440 57 1043 717 1668

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 620 050 517 1390 31 1087 793 1678

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 587 066 567 1653 43 1210 1307 1554

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 610 057 513 1515 43 1413 1160 1692

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 623 061 530 1567 37 1050 1073 1662 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (andor

2005) x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Soil chemical properties relate to air-dried soil from samples taken to a depth of 75 cm N C and LOI

refer to total N total C and loss on ignition respectively values for P (Oslashlsen extractable) and for K Mg and

Ca (extractable) are Mg l-1

of dried soil

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 33: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

33

Table S2 Soil chemical properties in 2010 at the lowland meadow At this site Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and Treatments 2-12

received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no fertilizer or lime in any year

Treatment pH N C LOI P K Mg Ca

1 Untreated control 530 031 364 742 46 2677 2119 1404

2 Limed (in 2005) control 613 029 341 681 41 2049 1494 2133

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 610 032 345 756 47 2769 2033 2247

4+ FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 624 032 364 745 51 2861 1946 2378

5 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 annual 629 032 362 716 65 2979 2335 2261

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 619 032 374 767 40 2142 1791 2319

7 + FYM at 12 t ha

-1 triennially 604 031 367 721 42 2164 1761 2138

8 + FYM at 24 t ha

-1 triennially 622 034 389 754 47 2758 1928 2509

9 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 603 031 352 714 47 2726 1491 2035

10 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 602 032 350 678 54 3288 1439 2237

11 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 591 031 355 700 42 2204 1689 2064

12 + Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 601 032 353 699 43 2469 1563 2179

13 Lime in years 1 602 031 387 734 36 1903 1569 2462

14 Lime as Tr 13 + FYM as Tr 4 621 032 367 717 50 2484 1760 2291

15 Lime as tr 13 + FYM as Tr 7 609 031 344 708 46 2055 1544 2349 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 (or 2005)

x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

Other notes as Table S1

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 34: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

34

Table S3 Positive and negative indicator species Positive indicator species for MG3 and MG5 communities are taken from

Robertson amp Jefferson 2000 Negative indicator species include species taken from the same source supplemented by others

associated with loss of conservation value when nutrients are added to semi-natural meadows in previous work (see main paper text) Positive indicator species Negative indicator species all communities) MG3 MG5 MG5 (contd) Alchemilla glabra Agrimonia eupatoria Polygala vulgaris Acer campestre Rumex acetosa

Alchemilla spp Alchemilla glabra Polygala spp Acer pseudoplatanus Rumex crispus Anemone nemorosa Alchemilla spp Potentilla erecta Arrhenatherum elatius Rumex obtusifolius Centaurea nigra Anemone nemorosa Primula veris Cirsium arvense Salix alba Cirsium heterophyllum Carex flacca Rhinanthus minor Cirsium vulgare Salix caprea Conopodium majus Carex nigra Poterium sanguisorba Crataegus monogyna Salix cinerea Euphrasia officinalis agg Carex panicea Sanguisorba officinalis Dactylis glomerata Salix fragilis Euphrasia spp Centaurea nigra Serratula tinctoria Fagus sylvatica Sambucus nigra Filipendula ulmaria Euphrasia officinalis agg Silaum silaus Fraxinus excelsior Senecio jacobaea Geranium sylvaticum Euphrasia spp Betonica officinalis Galium aparine Sorbus sp Geum rivale Filipendula ulmaria Succisa pratensis Heracleum sphondylium Stellaria media Lathyrus pratensis Filipendula vulgaris Tragopogon pratensis Holcus lanatus Trifolium repens

Scorzoneroides autumnalis Galium verum Ilex aquifolium Ulex europaeus Leontodon hispidus Genista tinctoria Lolium perenne Ulmus sp Leontodon spp Lathyrus linifolius Poa trivialis Tree seedling unid Lotus corniculatus Lathyrus pratensis Prunus spinosa Urtica dioica Persicaria bistorta Leontodon hispidus Quercus sp Viburnum lantana Rhinanthus minor Leontodon saxatilis Ranunculus repens Sanguisorba officinalis Leucanthemum vulgare Rosa arvensis Succisa pratensis Lotus corniculatus Rosa spp Trollius europaeus Pimpinella saxifraga Rubus fruticosus Species highlighted in bold in the MG3 and MG5 lists were recorded in at least one year at upland and lowland meadows respectively

Bolded negative indicator species were those recorded at either site

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 35: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

35

Table S4 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Degrees of freedom for Time and interactions with

Time are adjusted to account for departure from homogeneity of the population

covariance matrix using ε-coefficients calculated by the Greenhouse-Geisser method

(Genstat V Committee 1997 ndash see main paper for references) Significance levels

Plt005 Plt001 Plt0001 NS not significant (ie P gt005)

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 395 0001

Time 7 211 842 lt0001

Treat x Time 88 211 093 0647 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 434 0057 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 1392 0002

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1571 0001

Fo x R 1 14 477 0047

Fo x Fr 1 14 584 0030

R x Fr 1 14 300 1050 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 385 0070 NS

Time (T) 5 88 522 lt0001

T xFo 5 88 067 0647 NS

T xR 5 88 136 0247 NS

T xFr 5 88 238 0050

T x Fo x R 5 88 063 0677 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 88 014 0983 NS

T x R x Fr 5 88 121 0311 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 88 134 0255 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 088 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 36: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

36

Table S5 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 and 2005 and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 260 269 252 263 278 278

2 Limed (in 2005) control 256 252 240 231 251 250 254 241 263 258 252

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 267 262 259 253 261 261 278 259 277 268 277

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 266 248 226 233 244 258 238 226 252 246 265

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 221 223 224 220 216 198 179 191 186 202

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 257 243 238 247 261 258 250 259 287 271 270

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 267 262 250 263 270 280 283 256 272 261 276

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 248 254 238 243 261 271 267 250 260 260 278

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 259 251 260 252 263 266 254 229 264 258 266

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 273 243 240 247 249 262 248 232 261 242 260

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 250 256 256 254 260 269 276 260 289 276 269

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 263 254 233 240 261 269 257 241 273 260 270

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 268 248 261 258 273 273 276 274 281 268 264

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 256 224 242 229 239 251 238 239 242 227 262

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 242 244 243 241 264 264 269 233 264 252 263 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 37: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

37

Table S6 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the upland meadow

1999-2010 Other nots as in caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 193 0069 NS

Time 6 194 6668 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 090 0703 NS Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 422 0059 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 665 0022

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 818 0013

Fo x R 1 14 081 0383 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 018 0678 NS

R x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 5 83 3585 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 098 0435 NS

T xR 5 83 195 0096 NS

T xFr 5 83 060 0700 NS

T x Fo x R 5 83 095 0453 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 088 0498 NS

T x R x Fr 5 83 084 0525 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 023 0948 NS Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 025 0628 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 113 0361 NS

L x F 2 10 220 0162 NS

Time (T) 5 58 386 0004

T x L 5 58 035 0880 NS

T x F 10 58 068 0738 NS

T x L x F 10 58 043 0926 NS

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 38: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

38

Table S7 PI species m-2

at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 733 733 700 711 767 789

2 Limed (in 2005) control 522 511 633 667 622 622 633 611 622 678 733

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 500 456 633 667 689 711 700 678 656 656 667

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 522 450 600 594 606 656 622 628 628 667 644

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 478 389 556 589 522 533 533 522 500 522 533

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 467 411 600 667 644 644 589 656 633 667 689

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 600 522 633 678 722 722 711 733 722 733 778

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 456 456 578 611 633 644 578 656 589 656 656

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 444 456 600 633 678 689 678 667 700 733 744

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 511 433 600 611 622 689 633 611 589 611 622

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 533 600 733 756 733 789 778 789 811 789 800

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 544 533 678 689 722 778 733 711 733 711 700

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 500 489 600 667 667 689 656 689 678 722 711

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 467 389 589 533 600 611 578 667 533 544 600

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 389 456 500 578 578 556 589 578 567 600 622 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are

indicated by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 39: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

39

Table S8 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 367 0002

Time 5 161 281 lt0001

Treat x Time 67 161 133 0075 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 269 0123 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 122 0288 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 1089 0005

Fo x R 1 14 060 0452 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 010 0757 NS

R x Fr 1 14 001 0922 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 038 0548 NS

Time (T) 4 70 13996 lt0001

T xFo 4 70 142 0236 NS

T xR 4 70 151 0209 NS

T xFr 4 70 329 0016

T x Fo x R 4 70 106 0383 NS

T x Fo x Fr 4 70 124 0302 NS

T x R x Fr 4 70 051 0729 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 4 70 027 0896 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 063 0446 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 1126 0003

L x F 2 10 061 0562 NS

Time (T) 4 44 11331 lt0001

T x L 4 44 041 0801 NS

T x F 7 44 198 0080 NS

T x L x F 7 44 052 0815 NS

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 40: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

40

Table S9 PI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 380 436 397 454 501 482

2 Limed (in 2005) control 167 236 307 358 425 476 502 510 582 562 636

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 183 179 312 396 366 396 443 437 478 531 518

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 127 163 228 298 280 320 420 334 371 422 436

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 136 133 190 254 191 286 436 311 335 405 434

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 91 185 241 285 353 384 428 453 414 475 520

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 183 203 257 370 400 383 422 469 459 527 584

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 142 158 225 298 308 331 396 400 425 458 524

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 137 221 275 330 322 336 336 322 424 474 486

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 142 152 232 352 272 327 412 338 403 406 385

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 166 231 307 404 382 383 417 484 451 587 585

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 171 235 269 381 409 396 513 512 486 542 582

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 162 252 355 452 438 506 505 534 557 588 593

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 146 153 221 243 231 299 377 301 352 384 422

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 112 185 217 295 314 356 389 403 412 478 551

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated

by lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 41: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

41

Table S10 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI of live cover (PI) arcsine-

square root transformed data at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in

caption to Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 13 29 1810 lt0001

Time 6 194 3774 lt0001

Treat x Time 81 194 202 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1767 lt0001

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 2554 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2866 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 041 0532 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 105 0323 NS

R x Fr 1 14 442 0054 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 026 0618 NS

Time (T) 6 99 1564 lt0001

T xFo 6 99 119 0318 NS

T xR 6 99 267 0019

T xFr 6 99 661 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 99 082 0557 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 99 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 99 153 0176 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 99 119 0318 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 027 0615 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 2613 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 53 2225 lt0001

T x L 4 53 074 0569 NS

T x F 9 53 372 0010

T x L x F 9 53 075 0662 NS

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 42: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

42

Table S11 NI species of live cover (PI) at the upland meadow 1999-2010 Other notes as in caption to table S3

Treatment 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control - - - - - 80 134 130 84 54 51

2 Limed (in 2005) control 223 160 160 80 79 70 64 88 50 48 42

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 226 207 251 134 123 113 152 167 162 156 170

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 278 246 306 225 154 197 188 242 226 238 221

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 261 268 343 367 302 375 303 344 428 379 337

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 315 210 231 140 122 130 101 140 126 95 94

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 257 201 257 170 122 145 172 160 147 108 97

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 277 240 317 238 159 178 204 177 172 172 135

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 223 199 231 127 122 145 178 187 143 108 117

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 257 222 296 212 221 207 193 245 248 272 265

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 236 166 210 108 85 139 146 120 100 76 68

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 278 203 239 175 126 171 140 142 155 100 85

13 Lime in years 1 and 7 228 147 156 71 71 64 69 90 52 39 49

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 233 209 281 261 192 252 225 213 286 234 215

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 272 191 267 188 150 160 183 161 130 117 103

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 43: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

43

Table S12 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for total species-richness (species m-2

)

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 287 0009

Time 6 175 904 lt0001

Treat x Time 82 175 151 0012

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1352 0003

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 403 0064 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 609 0027

Fo x R 1 14 003 0865 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 006 0810 NS

R x Fr 1 14 293 0109 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 268 0124 NS

Time (T) 5 83 770 lt0001

T xFo 5 83 221 0061 NS

T xR 5 83 106 0389 NS

T xFr 5 83 639 lt0001

T x Fo x R 5 83 099 0429 NS

T x Fo x Fr 5 83 237 0046

T x R x Fr 5 83 127 0285 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 5 83 193 0098 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 001 0922 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 255 0127 NS

L x F 2 10 166 0239 NS

Time (T) 5 63 388 0004

T x L 5 63 076 0582 NS

T x F 10 63 112 0362 NS

T x L x F 10 63 123 0290 NS

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 44: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

44

Table S13 Totala species-richness (species m

-2) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Treatments 13-15 were limed in 1999 only and

Treatments 2-12 received lime in 2005 only Treatment 1 received no lime or fertilizer in any year

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 213 212 220 228 220 201 224 223 229 229 220 196

2 Limed (in 2005) control 221 210 216 212 230 178 216 221 226 230 213 210

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 223 226 221 221 241 191 226 229 201 221 192 197

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 208 230 218 217 224 210 204 223 199 217 176 164

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 229 229 214 202 207 182 186 174 164 154 133 140

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 231 219 214 242 223 200 226 222 217 217 211 223

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 207 210 194 198 204 184 210 218 199 220 196 217

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 207 212 203 204 228 214 200 221 213 230 221 182

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 233 218 219 228 234 223 206 230 204 220 201 203

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 226 224 193 216 206 210 207 216 213 216 191 184

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 224 220 219 246 219 211 239 236 231 240 229 220

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 213 212 218 237 212 206 240 227 213 217 213 214

13 Lime in year 1 199 234 210 223 231 206 219 222 228 229 206 219

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 196 201 178 189 194 189 172 193 191 201 194 187

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 211 228 212 223 212 201 222 223 217 226 213 206 aBryophytes grouped as a single species

Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 45: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

45

Table S14 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species m-2

at the lowland

meadow 1999-2010 Other caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 409 lt0001

Time 11 92 2598 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 192 155 0006

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 1414 0002

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 262 0128 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 2017 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 058 0459 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 004 0844 NS

R x Fr 1 14 166 0219 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 057 0463 NS

Time (T) 6 93 2202 lt0001

T xFo 6 93 184 0100 NS

T xR 6 93 092 0484 NS

T xFr 6 93 636 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 93 057 0753 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 93 061 0722 NS

T x R x Fr 6 93 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 93 188 0092 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 038 0551 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 440 0043

L x F 2 10 148 0274 NS

Time (T) 4 50 805 lt0001

T x L 4 50 192 0122 NS

T x F 8 50 209 0054 NS

T x L x F 8 50 082 0589 NS

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 46: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

46

Table S15 PI species m-2

at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 578 533 567 611 633 567 633 589 633 522 478 444

2 Limed (in 2005) control 544 500 533 500 589 567 589 544 567 500 467 456

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 533 489 511 567 544 489 544 522 356 422 367 411

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 500 533 456 511 522 478 500 511 400 356 356 367

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 533 522 478 433 489 444 400 344 278 244 278 300

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 544 500 456 567 556 544 611 544 478 500 456 456

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 533 511 522 533 522 489 544 489 489 456 400 444

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 489 500 433 522 533 556 511 500 489 456 478 411

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 589 533 478 533 533 522 511 522 467 422 378 411

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 600 567 444 489 478 511 489 478 467 422 356 367

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 511 533 489 578 533 600 611 556 578 544 511 489

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 578 511 533 589 544 567 622 556 533 500 478 467

13 Lime in year 1 478 489 433 500 544 456 489 500 556 500 467 433

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 500 467 322 467 422 433 333 422 400 322 389 356

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 533 544 522 533 556 578 611 567 544 533 511 478 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 47: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

47

Table S16 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for PI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 051 0907 NS

Time 6 193 2871 lt0001

Treat x Time 90 193 106 0365 NS

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 011 0745 NS

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 002 0890 NS

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 052 0483 NS

Fo x R 1 14 002 0890 NS

Fo x Fr 1 14 000 1000 NS

R x Fr 1 14 043 0523 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 003 0865 NS

Time (T) 6 90 1541 lt0001

T xFo 6 90 071 0642 NS

T xR 6 90 085 0535 NS

T xFr 6 90 195 0081 NS

T x Fo x R 6 90 114 0346 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 90 078 0588 NS

T x R x Fr 6 90 030 0935 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 90 131 0261 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 132 0277 NS

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 107 0379 NS

L x F 2 10 021 0814 NS

Time (T) 4 52 1535 lt0001

T x L 4 52 204 0102 NS

T x F 9 52 128 0270 NS

T x L x F 9 52 076 0653 NS

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 48: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

48

Table S17 PI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 397 320 257 255 252 315 256 296 270 184 288 320

2 Limed (in 2005) control 295 280 288 262 258 273 225 314 297 259 246 339

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 386 315 254 251 284 270 172 234 180 228 239 263

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 374 288 265 221 260 233 164 161 211 179 307 317

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 347 283 302 295 283 289 187 215 259 172 246 222

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 413 343 334 281 246 233 256 260 214 266 299 338

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 305 310 258 220 259 228 202 230 269 253 259 397

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 379 268 277 285 208 241 173 191 196 218 292 347

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 321 304 302 241 238 227 202 235 228 201 249 293

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 459 340 338 243 242 158 171 183 217 194 277 297

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 307 273 312 227 267 259 240 273 245 213 265 366

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 287 323 262 236 255 210 201 234 280 210 266 359

13 Lime in year 1 342 324 305 266 281 225 151 185 178 181 241 336

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 374 332 315 216 237 167 77 157 189 183 275 346

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 443 357 205 228 246 199 151 227 214 227 309 325 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 49: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

49

Table S18 Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for NI species of live vegetation

(PI) arcsine-square root transformed data at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Other

caption notes as Table S2

Treatment series Factor

Degrees

of

freedom F-ratio Probability Significance

All treatments Treatment 14 28 2143 lt0001

Time 7 215 3359 lt0001

Treat x Time 100 215 209 lt0001

Form x Rate Form (Fo) 1 14 965 0008

x Frequency (FRF) Rate (R) 1 14 3913 lt0001

Frequency (Fr) 1 14 11389 lt0001

Fo x R 1 14 494 0043

Fo x Fr 1 14 292 0110 NS

R x Fr 1 14 260 0129 NS

Fo x R x Fr 1 14 253 0134 NS

Time (T) 6 97 2290 lt0001

T xFo 6 97 102 0417 NS

T xR 6 97 159 0158 NS

T xFr 6 97 581 lt0001

T x Fo x R 6 97 087 0520 NS

T x Fo x Fr 6 97 067 0674 NS

T x R x Fr 6 97 107 0386 NS

T x Fo x R x Fr 6 97 070 0650 NS

Lime99 x Lime99 (L) 1 10 541 0042

FYM frequency (LFF) FYMfreq (F) 2 10 4076 lt0001

L x F 2 10 017 0846 NS

Time (T) 4 54 1529 lt0001

T x L 4 54 284 0033

T x F 9 54 353 0002

T x L x F 9 54 071 0697 NS

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 50: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

50

Table S19 NI species of live vegetation (PI) at the lowland meadow 1999-2010 Notes as in caption to Table S11

Treatment 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1 Untreated control 51 16 59 28 07 24 27 47 81 39 17 09

2 Limed (in 2005) control 27 25 35 77 21 18 28 43 82 55 31 22

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 43 80 38 67 79 62 202 148 275 184 90 110

4 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 32 61 86 106 84 157 158 236 192 275 200 339

5 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 68 104 216 195 204 216 428 357 320 485 524 577

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 25 42 39 83 19 13 50 49 143 80 63 30

7 +FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 33 37 65 99 35 48 81 89 78 105 37 90

8 +FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 42 56 55 88 63 78 141 163 203 286 173 90

9 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 58 42 73 98 90 118 152 163 234 249 182 286

10 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 43 91 118 197 125 96 238 260 204 371 323 259

11 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 31 55 71 109 23 18 99 86 66 87 89 38

12 +Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 39 78 102 120 47 46 90 127 114 173 96 142

13 Lime in year 1 12 36 54 86 42 83 107 91 105 48 49 50

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 33 95 87 150 108 161 285 319 249 251 200 177

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 47 37 78 99 43 66 233 178 163 161 45 31 Treatments comprising factorial series for fertilizer Form x Rate x Frequency (FRF) or Lime in 1999 x FYM frequency (LFF) are indicated by

lsquo+rsquo and lsquorsquo respectively

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 51: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

51

Table S20 Effect of treatments on five key variables at two sites in 2010 Values for positive indicator (PI) species are for MG3 and MG5 PI species for

the upland and lowland meadows respectively Treatment 1 was not included in ANOVAS adjusted for covariance with 1999 data (PI species at the

upland meadow - italicised) Values in parentheses are means of non-transformed data these are back-transformed means where data were adjusted for

covariance with 1999 data All treatments received lime in year 2005 except untreated controls (Tr1) at both sites and Trs 13-15 at lowland meadow)

Upland meadow (UM) Lowland meadow (LM)

Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p) Species m-2

Cover (arcsine-sqrt of p)

Treatment Total a PI

b NI PIb NI Total

a PIb NI PI NI

1 Untreated control 282 789 456 0769 (483) 0227 (51) 203 424 211 0601 (320) 0097 (09)

2 Limed (in 1995) control 254 722 367 0908 (621) 0204 (42) 216 451 278 0621 (339) 0143 (22)

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 281 665 589 0780 (494) 0423 (170) 202 413 344 0537 (263) 0322 (110)

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 268 633 578 0733 (447) 0489 (221) 164 385 367 0597 (317) 0620 (339)

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 202 542 522 0725 (440) 0618 (337) 140 302 444 0488 (222) 0865 (577)

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 272 703 533 0845 (559) 0311 (94) 227 451 389 0620 (338) 0169 (30)

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 280 730 522 0846 (560) 0314 (97) 219 446 378 0681 (397) 0286 (90)

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 279 675 544 0811 (526) 0375 (135) 186 435 333 0629 (347) 0290 (90)

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 268 769 533 0778 (492) 0347 (117) 203 385 456 0572 (293) 0561 (286)

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 266 616 600 0671 (387) 0541 (265) 186 335 378 0575 (297) 0523 (259)

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 271 783 467 0862 (576) 0262 (68) 237 501 289 0649 (366) 0196 (38)

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 274 678 544 0851 (565) 0291 (85) 221 446 400 0641 (359) 0347 (142)

13 Lime in year 1 (+ yr 7 at the UM) 269 710 433 0870 (584) 0220 (49) 223 463 411 0614 (336) 0210 (50)

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 268 614 578 0707 (422) 0480 (215) 187 373 422 0627 (346) 0433 (177)

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 269 672 544 0860 (574) 0327 (103) 211 480 322 0606 (325) 0176 (31)

SEDs All Trs except Tr 4 at the UM 1725 0583 0404 05827 00436 123 0487 074 00539 00856

Tr 4 v others at the UM 1494 0504 0350 05044 00377 - - - - - -

P for treatment effect in ANOVA 0017 0016 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 lt0001 0019 NS NS lt0001

Residual df 31 28 31 28 31 28 27 28 28 28

Values in bold are significantly different (Plt005) from the limed control treatment (Tr 2) a Values for total species per m

2 include individual bryophyte species

b Values adjusted for covariance with 1999 data except for the untreated control treatment at the upland meadow (not present in 1999)

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 52: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

52

Table S21 Soil microbial community analysis at the upland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

2 Limed (in 1995) control 883 339 268 169 252 0346 010 0015

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 756 169 232 061 190 0258 008 0013

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 818 976 253 339 220 0367 009 0008

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 866 288 284 165 164 0085 006 0006

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 734 1189 222 374 231 0453 011 0019

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 877 962 267 317 209 0312 008 0003

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 846 496 264 207 188 0110 007 0008

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 862 347 278 083 175 0045 006 0000

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 727 144 236 092 181 0053 008 0004

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 743 108 239 044 158 0082 007 0004

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 1054 816 321 198 273 0388 009 0004

13 Lime in year 1 943 565 296 157 197 0053 007 0000

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 895 1129 286 367 202 0220 007 0000

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 814 378 252 085 212 0082 009 0004

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006

Page 53: Ecologically-sustainable fertility management for the ...sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=...value grasslands that remain or that have been created. Cynosurus cristatus

53

Table S22 Soil microbial community analysis at the lowland meadow total bacterial and fungal phospho-lipid fatty acid (PLFA) content (μmol g-1

) in

2010 and the ratio of fungalbacterial PLFA

Total PLFA Bacterial PLFA Fungal PLFA FungalBacterial ratio

Treatment Mean se Mean se Mean se Mean se

1 Untreated control 705 500 217 214 189 0383 009 0017

2 Limed (in 1995) control 611 502 183 148 172 0214 010 0007

3 FYM at 6 t ha-1

annual 699 1068 215 259 161 0102 008 0009

4 FYM at 12 t ha-1

annual 653 379 204 092 151 0239 008 0012

5 FYM at 24 t ha-1

annual 648 616 200 141 143 0195 007 0009

6 FYM at 6 t ha-1

triennially 750 483 224 127 225 0135 010 0012

7 FYM at 12 t ha-1

triennially 747 232 229 108 230 0283 010 0018

8 FYM at 24 t ha-1

triennially 681 794 225 296 152 0221 007 0013

9 Inorg equivalent to Tr 4 605 458 186 182 128 0129 007 0009

10 Inorg equivalent to Tr 5 627 266 204 143 129 0131 006 0009

11 Inorg equivalent to Tr 7 696 270 221 027 209 0306 010 0015

12 Inorg equivalent to Tr 8 652 425 190 072 153 0172 007 0007

13 Lime in year 1 657 546 202 152 187 0352 009 0015

14 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 4 709 927 238 233 148 0110 007 0013

15 Lime in year 1 + FYM as Tr 7 698 1205 249 112 161 0255 008 0006


Recommended