There is a newer version of the record available.

Published August 19, 2024 | Version v1
Dataset Open

Nash's Field grassland experiment Silwood Park, UK

  • 1. ROR icon Imperial College London

Description

Nash's Field is one of the field experiments of Imperial College London, Silwood Park campus and is part of The Ecological Continuity Trust (ECT). The experiment is a long-term study that aims to understand the degree to which nutrients, soil acidity and herbivory affect grassland ecology. It is a five-factor factorial experiment replicated in two blocks of plots using a split-plot design in a neutral grassland (MG5 Cynosurus cristatus/Centaurea debeauxii, under the UK National Vegetation Classification system). Overall, the experiment contains 8 invertebrate exclusion plots (± insects and ± molluscs, 22 x 44 m), 16 vertebrate exclusion plots (± rabbits, 22 x 22 m), 32 soil acidity plots (high vs low pH, 8 x 18 m), 96 plant competition plots (± grasses, ± herbs, 6 x 8 m) and 1,152 fertilization plots (12 combinations of N, P, K and Mg, 2 x 2 m). Except for herbicides, which were used only at the start of the experiment, all treatments have been applied continuously since 1992. Data of aboveground biomass or coverage per plant species of all herbaceous plants present has been collected annually for several years from 1992.

Methods (English)

The study site is Silwood Park Campus from Imperial College London, Buckhurst Road, Ascot, Berkshire SL5 7PY, United Kingdom.  Silwood Park campus, with 78 ha, contains acid grasslands, scrubland, ancient woodlands and few decades old oak-dominated woodlands. Silwood Park experiences an average annual rainfall of 698mm with little seasonal pattern (1987-2022).  Mean hourly temperature is 10oC with July max of 23 oC and January min of 1.4 oC (1987-2022).

The experiment is a multi-factor factorial experiment replicated in two blocks of 22 x 44 m plots using a split-plot design. 

Factor 1: Invertebrate herbivore exclusion: There are eight 22 x 44 m plots. Four plots (s, l, m, n, p, q, r, k) separated at least 10 m from each other. Each plots is assigned a with and without insecticide, and with and without molluscicide treatment:

Table: PLOTTYPE

Treatment

Code

Plot name

Insecticide spray

spr.mol

m

Insecticide spray

spr.mol

q

Molluscicide pellets

ins.pel

n

Molluscicide pellets

ins.pel

p

Insecticide spray and molluscicide pellets

spr.pel

s

Insecticide spray and molluscicide pellets

spr.pel

r

Nothing applied

ins.mol

l

Nothing applied

ins.mol

k

 

Pesticides are applied two or three times during the spring - summer period in April/May, May/June and June/July. Last application of insecticide is given to kill cinnabar moth caterpillars.  Insecticide spray is applied using a hand-pumped, backpack sprayer, during calm, dry spells. Molluscicide pellets are applied using a two-wheeled, hand-driver spreader.

Insects are excluded with a combination of knockdown (contact) insecticides with broad spectrum and systemic insecticides. Known products applied over the duration of the experiment. 

Years

Type

Name

Active ingredient

Dosis2

Note

1992-2014

Molluscicide

Mifaslug, Corso 3SSP

3% w/w metaldehyde

0.011 Kg m-2

Maybe more but no records

1992-2014

Insecticide, broad spectrum, contact

Ambush, Clayton Pontoon 48EC

Synthetic pyrethoid 150 g/ha-1, Chlorpyrifos

 

Maybe more but no records

1992-2014

Insecticide, systemic

Dimethoate-40, Danading Progress

dimethoate 336 g/ha or 400g/l

 

Maybe more but no records

2015

Molluscicide

Corso 3SSP, sipcam, MAPP 15491

3% w/w metaldehyde

 

Out of market in 2015

2015-2017

Insecticide, broad spectrum, contact

Pontoon 48EC Clayton48EC, MAPP 14555

 

Chlorpyrifos480 g/l

 

Out of market/banned 2015

2015-2020

Insecticide, systemic

Danadim ProgressTM, MAPP 15890

400g/l (39% w/w) Dimethoate

 

Out of market/banned

2016-

present

Molluscicide

1Gusto3, Adama, MAPP 14308

3% w/w metaldehyde

0.01 Kg m-2

Out of market/banned

2016-present

Molluscicide

1Triger3, Certis, MAPP 14304

3% w/w metaldehyde

0.01 Kg m-2

Out of market/banned

2018-present

Insecticide, broad spectrum, contact

Decis Protech, Bayer, MAPP 16160

15 gl (1.5% w/w) deltamethrin

 

 

2021-present

Insecticide, systemic

Mainman

500 g / kg flonicamid

 

 

1HSE issued permit for trial purposes until our molluscicide pellets supply finished. Permit # COP2022/00268

2 Max recommended in packaging.

Factor 2. Large herbivore exclusion: Half of each 22 x 44 m plots is enclosed with a fence 1 m high and 3 cm square wire-mesh. The fence is supported by wooden posts and reinforced on the top with a rigid wire. Mesh was buried 5 cm deep with bottom 15 cm turned outwards to prevent rabbits digging through. Each fenced/unfenced square measures 22 m2. Fence excludes rabbits but does not stop voles, wood mice or deer of entering the plot. Fences were replaced in November 2023 in all fenced plots.

Fenced squares are cut for hay with a hand-held sickle bar mower in late August each year, and cut herbage is raked and removed from the plots.  Tree samplings are removed from all plots.

Factor 3. Soil pH treatments: Fenced and unfenced squares are divided into two 8 x 18 m subplots, separated by 2 m, to create limed and unlimed treatments. Lime in Nash's Field has decreased soil acidity from 4.1 to 7. In Autumn 1991,1993,1994, 1999 and 2003, 20 tonnes ha-1 or 2kg/m2 of CaO were applied to all limed subplots. Most recently lime is applied every five years, last applications were done on February 2015 and 2020.

Plots where limed are applied are indicated in the field with a row of 9 iron rods painted white located in the southwest corner of each 2 x 2 m nutrient plot.  Unlimed plots' rods are unpainted.

Factor 4. Plant competition: Each 18 x 8 m subplot for both limed and unlimed treatments was subdivided into three 6 x 8 m plots to create three treatments: minus grass, minus herbs and control. 

Minus herbs treatment: herbs were removed with the selective herbicide, Pasturol (Dicamba  + MCPA  + Mecoprop at 2.7 kg active ingredient ha-1) from Farmers Crop Chemicals, Inkberrow, Worcs, UK;

Minus grass treatment: grasses were removed with the selective herbicides Clout (alloxydim-sodium at 1.0 kg active ingredient ha-1) from Hortichem, Ongar, Essex, UK, or Checkmate (sethoxydim at 870 g active ingredient ha-1) from Rhone Poulenc Agriculture Ltd, Ongar, Essex, UK.

Herbicides were applied in late April each year from 1992 to 1994 following products instructions. Nothing was applied to control plots. No application of herbicides has been done since 1994.

Factor 5. Mineral fertilization: Each of the 6 x 8 m plant competition plots is split into 12 4m2 subplots for the application of different combination of nutrients:  N, P, K and Mg.

Table: NUTTREAT

Treatment

Code

Minerals applied

Iron rod colour code

No nutrients

no.nutr

none

white

Plus K

plus.k

K

green

Plus Mg

plus.mg

Mg

yellow

Plus N

plus.n

N

red

Plus P

plus.p

P

blue

Plus P, K

plus.pk

P, K

blue-green

Minus P, K

min.pk

N, Mg

blue-green-white

Minus K

min.k

N, Mg, P

green-white

Minus Mg

min.mg

N, P, K

yellow-white

Minus P

min.p

N, K, Mg

blue-white

Minus N

min.n

K, Mg, P

red-white

All nutrients

all.nutr

N, Mg, P, K

blue-unpainted

Minerals have been applied annually during the first weeks of April since 1992

N: Ammonium nitrate (NH4NO3) or prilled urea (CO(NH2)2) at 144 kg ha-1year-1

K: Muriate of potash (KCl:NaCl ) at 224 kg ha-1 year-1

P: Triple superphosphate (Ca(H2PO4)2·H2O) at 35 kg ha-1 year-1

Mg: Epsom salts (MgSO4.7H2O ) at 11 kg ha-1 year-1

Content of soil minerals in Nash's field made in 1991 registered 5.6±0.47 mg kg-1 NaHCO3-soluble P (1 SE, n=8), 88.4±7.0 mg kg-1 exchangeable K (1 SE, n=8), and 37.5±21 (1 SE, n=8) mg kg-1 Mg. Modelled total atmospheric N deposition estimated are to be 22 kg N ha-1yr-1

A coloured iron rod on the northwest corner of each 2 x 2 m plot indicates the nutrient treatment received. Colour codes for each treatment appear in table NUTTREAT

Seed sowing: In spring 1996 seeds of 62 grassland species were sown into the southern half of all Plus Mg and Minus MG plots (1 x 2m subplots). 57 of these species were not found in Nash’s Field at the time. Seeds from John Chambers’ Wildflower seeds, Kettering, UK were applied at a rate of 5 g m-2. Prior to sowing in the field, all species were tested for germination rate and susceptibility to potential toxic effects of insecticide and molluscicide in greenhouse trials.

Methods (English)

Data collected in Nash's Field experiment includes aboveground biomass and percentage cover of each species of herbaceous plant present in a sampled plot, total biomass, presence of species and soil pH.

 Aboveground biomass: measured in one 50 x 25 cm quadrat selected at random from the central 1 x 1 m section of each 2 x 2 m fertilized plot.  Plants are cut to ground level using scissors and then species are separated in the laboratory before being dried (24 h at 80 °C) and weighted.  Cut plant material that cannot be assigned to a plant species is also dried and weighed. This biomass is then divided and added to the biomass of each species present in the 2x2 m plot according to its relative proportion [Ba + ((Ba / Bt) * Br)) where Ba is the biomass of plant a, Bt is total biomass for the 2 x 2 m plot and Br is the biomass of the remaining plant material for the same plot].  Thus, although scale precision is two decimal places (0.01 g), precision in the biomass data table ranges from 0.1 to up 1 x 10-9, due to the distribution of weight from each plot's residual biomass.

Percentage cover: measured for the whole area of each fertilized plot (2 x 2 m). The percentage of the plot covered by each plant species, bare soil, dead organic matter or bryophytes in each experimental plot is estimated by two people. Values entered are percentages agreed by both researchers. Estimations are done by eye standing by the border.  Because plant foliage can overlap with each other, for any given fertilized 2 x 2 m plot the added cover for all species present can be higher than 100%. For any given plant species, bare soil, dead organic matter or bryophytes with a percentage of cover lower than 1% a qualitative score of "+", "++", or "+++" is recorded. In the data table "+" was converted to 0.01% and "++" to 0.1% in years 2000, 2001 and 2004, and  "+" was converted to 0.1%, "++" to 0.2% and "+++" to 0.3% for cover data in years 2005, 2006, 2008 and 2012.

Percentage of dead matter and bryophytes cover is estimated from their present over bare soils and excluding any present under live vegetation.

 Biomass data 2018/2019. The presence of plant species in the whole 2x2 m plot was registered as well as the dry aboveground biomass for all plants combined for the central 0.5 x 0.5 m section of the plot (Tables: NashKS_presence.csv, NashKS_biomass_total.csv).  For two plots in the unfenced area of plot L, only the aboveground biomass of the entire 2x2 m plot was measured (Table: NashKS_biomass_UGRASS.csv).  Weight was measured at least 72 hours of drying at 75oC. (Table: NashKS_biomass_total.csv).

Data soil pH 2019: Soil pH was measured on 2007 and February 2019 to assess the need of lime application on limed plots. For 2019 soil pH was measured in random nutrient plots (see Table: NUTTREAT) across all other treatments (invertebrate herbivores -plots K to S, vertebrate herbivores -fences, pH control and herbicides). A total of 96 plots were sampled. pH was measured with a Hanna Instruments GroLine soil pH tester -HI981030 calibrated with 7.0 and 4.0 pH buffer solutions. Two holes ca 8cm deep were done in the centre of each plot. One pH measure was read in each hole after soil was soaked with tap water. The probe was clean with tap water and dried between each measure (Table: NashKS_pH.csv). Three measures outside plots were done as controls. Three measures of soil temperature were done the last day of sampling (Feb 13) between 10 and 11 am with a glass and mercury thermometer. Soil temperature at about 8cm deep was in average 6,3 oC (5, 7, 7 oC).

Biomass data 2019: The dry aboveground biomass for all plants combined for the central 0.5 x 0.5 m section of some the plots were measured in the last week of July. Wet weight was measured one day after cutting and dry wet at least 72 hours of drying at 75oC after that. (Table: NashKS_biomass_total.csv).

Plant traits data 2023: Measured as part of palatability study. Leaves for about five individual plants taken to estimate traits. Leaves were clipped and put in a sealed bag with spray water until set for rehydration in the lab. Rehydration was done by setting the plant in a flask with water or pressed between two sheets of water-soaked tissue and stored at 2 to 5oC overnight. Leaves were then scanned on a A4-sized paper with scale line and area was estimated using ImageJ software. A portion of the fresh leave was then drilled to take disks for palatability experiment. The rest were then weighted fresh and after 72h of drying at about 70oC.

Files

NashKS_treatments.csv

Files (14.0 MB)

Name Size Download all
md5:0d642f9e157634006bb0c556ae19a426
5.1 MB Preview Download
md5:a8610f4f5336dd2df0955e468d7a89b0
32.5 kB Preview Download
md5:ce345b2c5dcea535a6974922322ce4bb
1.1 kB Preview Download
md5:bf234096309fad625e7eb99e8fe820cc
7.5 MB Preview Download
md5:07112d2703f0c5ac363e283035e80b32
246.2 kB Preview Download
md5:abe9db9755b388e981e1bb46bc16ed87
477.4 kB Preview Download
md5:68203021947c226cfb0415575e1278f1
150.5 kB Preview Download
md5:108f5469bed1c81affcef6eda330888a
153.9 kB Preview Download
md5:7b3ebb88d91b9ef0e0016d63818f9f57
181.1 kB Preview Download
md5:b4f7e07a1c90385cc681809171c899a9
15.7 kB Preview Download
md5:6c40a1f9c9bf7fdf195341e070324803
154.4 kB Preview Download
md5:0ee47a2e6a44dfa87841a6c8ceb7585e
2.0 kB Preview Download

Additional details

Dates

Available
1992
Start of data collection. See file 'NashKS_data_summary' for details of data collection dates

Biodiversity

Decimal latitude
51.41
Decimal longitude
-0.65
Country
United Kingdom
Kingdom
Plantae

References

  • Smith TP, Mombrikotb SB, Ransome E, Kontopoulos DG, Pawar S, Bell T (2022) Latent functional diversity may accelerate microbial community responses to temperature fluctuations. eLife: 11: e80867. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.80867
  • Mombrikotb SB, Agtmaal MV, Johnstone E, Crawley MJ, Gweon HS, Griffiths RI, Bell T (2022) The interactions and hierarchical effects of long-term agricultural stressors on soil bacterial communities. Environmental Microbiology Reports 14: 711-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-2229.13106
  • Thornley R, Gerard FF, White K, Verhoef A (2022) Intra-annual taxonomic and phenological drivers of spectral variance in grasslands. Remote Sensing of Environment, 271. Doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2022.112908
  • Leverkus AB, Crawley MJ (2020) Temporal variation in effect sizes in a long‐term, split‐plot field experiment. Ecology. Doi: 10.1002/ecy.3009
  • Guignard MS, Crawley MJ, Kovalenko D, Nichols RA, Trimmer M, Leitch AR, Leitch IJ (2019) Interactions between plant genome size, nutrients and herbivory by rabbits, molluscs and insects on a temperate grassland. Proceedings of the Royal Society b-Biological Sciences, Vol: 286. Doi: 10.1098/rspb.2018.2619
  • Egan G, Zhou X, Wang D, Jia Z, Crawley MJ, Fornara D (2018) Long-term effects of grassland management on soil microbial abundance: implications for soil carbon and nitrogen storage. Biochemistry, 141: 213-228. Doi: 10.1007/s10533-018-0515-1
  • Egan G, Crawley MJ, Fornara DA (2018) Effects of long-term grassland management on the carbon and nitrogen pools of different soil aggregate fractions. Science of the Total Environment, 613: 810-819. Doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.165
  • Heyburn J, Mckenzie P, Crawley MJ, Fornara DA (2017) Effects of grassland management on plant C:N:P stoichiometry: implications for soil element cycling and storage. Ecosphere 8(10) e01963
  • Heyburn J, McKenzie P, Crawley MJ, Fornara DA (2017) Long-term belowground effects of grassland management: the key role of liming. Ecological Applications 27: 2001-2012. Doi: 10.1002/eap.1585
  • Cenini VL, Fornara DA, McMullan G, Ternan N, Carolan R, Crawley MJ, Clement J-C, Lavorel S (2016) Linkages between extracellular enzyme activities and the carbon and nitrogen content of grassland soils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 96: 198-206. doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2016.02.015
  • Cenini VL, Fornara DA, McMullan G, Ternan N, Lajtha K, Crawley MJ (2015) Chronic nitrogen fertilization and carbon sequestration in grassland soils: evidence of a microbial enzyme link. Biogeochemistry 126: 301. doi:10.1007/s10533-015-0157-5
  • Macdonald CA, Crawley MJ, Wright DJ, Kuczynski J, Robinson L, Knight R, Al-Soud WA, Sørensen SJ, Deng Y, Zhou J, Singh B (2015) Identifying qualitative effects of different grazing types on below-ground communities and function in a long-term field experiment. Environmental Microbiology 17: 841–854. Doi: 10.1111/1462-2920.12539
  • Fornara DA, Banin L, Crawley MJ (2013) Multi-nutrient vs. nitrogen-only effects on carbon sequestration in grassland soils. Global Change Biology 19: 3848–3857. doi:10.1111/gcb.12323/suppinfo
  • Allan E, Crawley MJ (2011) Contrasting effects of insect and molluscan herbivores on plant diversity in a long-term field experiment. Ecology Letters, 14: 1246–1253. Doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01694.x
  • Del-Val E, Crawley MJ (2005) What limits herb biomass in grasslands: competition or herbivory? Oecologia 142: 202–211. Doi: 10.1007/s00442-004-1719-8
  • Rees M, Condit R, Crawley M, Pacala S, Tilman D (2001) Long-term studies of vegetation dynamics. Science 293: 650–655. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1062586
  • Edwards GR, Bourdôt GW, Crawley MJ (2000) Influence of herbivory, competition and soil fertility on the abundance of Cirsium arvense in acid grassland. Journal of Applied Ecology 37: 321–334. Doi:10.1046/j.1365-2664.2000.00495.x
  • Edwards GR, Crawley MJ, Heard MS (1999) Factors influencing molehill distribution in grassland: Implications for controlling the damage caused by molehills. Journal of Applied Ecology 36: 434–442. Doi:10.1046/j.1365-2664.1999.00411.x
  • Edwards GR, Crawley MJ (1999) Herbivores, seed banks and seedling recruitment in mesic grassland. Journal of Ecology 87: 423–435. Doi:10.1046/j.1365-2745.1999.00363.x