Mountainous grasslands in South America represent highly diverse ecosystems that offer a broad spectrum of benefits to people. These include the regulation and purification of water, prevention of soil erosion, provision of livestock feed, and preservation of cultural heritage. Previous research has underscored the significant role of grazing in shaping the diversity and productivity of grassland ecosystems, particularly in highly productive, eutrophic systems. In such systems, grazing has been demonstrated to restore grassland plant diversity by reducing primary productivity. However, it remains unclear whether these findings are applicable to South American mountainous grasslands, where plants are adapted to different environmental conditions. To address this gap, we conducted a meta-analysis of experiments that excluded livestock grazing. The goal was to quantify the impact of grazing exclusion on plant diversity and productivity across mountainous grasslands in South America. Our findings, akin to studies conducted in temperate grasslands, revealed that herbivore exclusion led to an increase in aboveground biomass. Nevertheless, it also resulted in a reduction in species richness and Shannon diversity. Interestingly, the effects of grazing exclusion became more pronounced with longer exclusion durations, yet remained robust to various climatic conditions, including mean annual precipitation and mean annual temperature, as well as the evolutionary history of grazing. In contrast to results observed in temperate grasslands, the reduction in species richness due to herbivore exclusion was not correlated with increased aboveground biomass. This suggests that the processes regulating (sub)tropical grassland plant diversity may differ from those in temperate grasslands. Further research is imperative to better comprehend the specific factors influencing plant diversity and productivity in South American montane grasslands and to discern the ecological implications of herbivore exclusion in these unique ecosystems..

Global change drivers such as anthropogenic nutrient inputs simultaneously alter biodiversity, species composition, and ecosystem functions such as aboveground biomass. These changes are interconnected by complex feedbacks among extinction, colonization, and shifting relative abundance. Here, we use a novel temporal application of the Price equation to quantify the functional contributions of species that are lost, gained, and persist under ambient and experimental nutrient addition in 59 global grasslands. Under ambient conditions, compositional and biomass turnover was high, but species losses (i.e., local extinctions) were balanced by gains (i.e. colonization). There was biomass loss associated with species loss under fertilization. Few species were gained in fertilized conditions over time but those that were, and species that persisted, contributed to net biomass gains, outweighing biomass loss. These components of community change are key to understanding the relationship between change in composition, diversity and functioning.

Dominant and non-dominant plants could be subject to different biotic and abiotic influences, partially because dominant plants modify the environment where non-dominant plants grow, causing an interaction asymmetry. Among other possibilities, if dominant plants compete strongly, they should deplete most resources forcing non-dominant plants into a more constrained niche space. Conversely, if dominant plants are constrained by the environment, they might not fully deplete available resources but instead ameliorate some of the environmental constraints limiting non-dominants. Hence, the nature of the interactions between the non-dominants could be modified by dominant species. However, when plant competition and environmental constraints have similar effects on dominant and non-dominant species no difference is expected. By estimating phylogenetic dispersion in 78 grasslands across five continents, we found that dominant species were clustered (underdispersed), suggesting dominant species are likely organized by environmental filtering, and that non-dominant species were either randomly assembled or overdispersed. Traits showed similar trends, but insufficient data prevented further analyses. Furthermore, several lineages scattered in the phylogeny had more non-dominant species, suggesting that traits related to non-dominants are phylogenetically conserved and have evolved multiple times. We found some environmental drivers of the dominant—non-dominant disparity. Our results indicate that assembly patterns for dominants and non-dominants are different, consistent with asymmetries in assembly mechanisms. Among the different mechanisms we evaluated, the results suggest two complementary hypotheses seldom explored: (1) Non-dominant species include lineages adapted to thrive in the environment generated by the dominant species. (2) Even when dominant species reduce resources to non-dominant ones, dominant species could have a stronger effect on—at least—some non-dominants by ameliorating the impact of the environment on them, than by depleting resources and increasing the environmental stress to those non-dominants. The results show that the dominant–non-dominant asymmetry has ecological and evolutionary consequences fundamental to understand plant communities.

Nutrients and herbivores have independent effects on the temporal stability of aboveground biomass in grasslands; however, their joint effects may not be additive and may also depend on spatial scales. In an experiment adding nutrients and excluding herbivores in 34 globally distributed grasslands, we found that nutrients and herbivores mainly had additive effects. Nutrient addition consistently reduced stability at the local and larger spatial scales (aggregated local communities), while herbivore exclusion weakly reduced stability at these scales. Moreover, nutrient addition reduced stability primarily by causing changes in local community composition over time and by reducing local species richness and evenness. In contrast, herbivore exclusion weakly reduced stability at the larger scale mainly by decreasing asynchronous dynamics among local communities, but also by weakly decreasing local species richness. Our findings indicate disentangling the influences of processes operating at different spatial scales may improve conservation and management in stabilizing grassland biomass.

1. The reduction of plant diversity following eutrophication threatens many ecosystems worldwide. Yet, the mechanisms by which species are lost following nutrient enrichment are still not completely understood, nor are the details of when such mechanisms act during the growing season, which hampers understanding and the development of mitigation strategies. 2. Using a common garden competition experiment, we found that early-season differences in growth rates among five perennial grass species measured in monoculture predicted short-term competitive dominance in pairwise combinations and that this effect was stronger under a fertilisation treatment. 3. We also examined the role of early-season growth rate in determining the outcome of competition along an experimental nutrient gradient in an alpine meadow. Early differences in growth rate between species predicted short-term competitive dominance under both ambient and fertilized conditions and competitive exclusion under fertilized conditions. 4. The results of these two studies suggests that plant species growing faster during the early stage of the growing season gain a competitive advantage over species that initially grow more slowly, and that this advantage is magnified under fertilisation. This finding is consistent with the theory of asymmetric competition for light in which fast-growing species can intercept incident light and hence outcompete and exclude slower-growing (and hence shorter) species. We predict that the current chronic nutrient inputs into many terrestrial ecosystems worldwide will reduce plant diversity and maintain low biodiversity state by continuously favouring fast-growing species. Biodiversity management strategies should focus on controlling nutrient inputs and reducing the growth of fast-growing species early in the season.