Skip to content
Ecological Intelligence

Ecological evidence.
Independent perspective.
Explore Wild Lands ↗

Wild Lands / Ecological Intelligence

Removing herbivores did not simply undo invasive-grass effects

A six-farm Australian experiment linked mammal exclusion and African lovegrass invasion to changing microbes and arthropods.

Removing herbivores did not simply undo invasive-grass effects
Clint Wirick/USFWS. Illustrative North American grazed-versus-ungrazed prairie comparison; not the Australian experiment. · Public domain — U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service media asset. · Rights: Public domain
Evidence
Peer-reviewed
Geography
Six livestock-grazed farms in temperate Australian grassy woodlands
System
Native grassy woodlands; invasive grasses; herbivory; foliar microbiomes

WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS

Across six Australian farms, researchers nested herbivore-exclusion treatments in plots dominated by native kangaroo grass or co-dominated by invasive African lovegrass. Invasion and herbivore exclusion both altered litter, microclimate, leaf-associated microbial communities and arthropod assemblages. Phyllosphere diversity generally declined under the interacting disturbances, and mammal exclusion changed fungal infection patterns affecting the native grass.

WHY IT MATTERS / OUR READ

The most useful management signal is that grazing and invasion cannot always be treated as independent switches. The ecological result of removing herbivores depends on which native and invasive species—and microbial interactions—are present; evaluate the whole plant–consumer system.

CAVEATS / UNCERTAINTY

Experimental results are local to six grazed farms and nested treatments. 'Buffering' by some herbivores is not a universal endorsement of livestock grazing or evidence of recovery in native plant populations.

SOURCE

Fioratti Junod et al. · iScience · grassland invasion and herbivore exclusion
View original evidence ↗