Botanical Composition
There have been botanical analyses on 13 occasions spread unevenly over
the life of the experiment. There was, unfortunately, a long gap between
1907 and 1947, in which no full analysis was undertaken, though the plots
were assessed visually. A variety of methods of assessment have been used
and not on all occasions have all the plots been analysed.
The
reason for the loss of interest after 1907 was undoubtedly due in part
to the lack of change that had occurred over the 10 years from the initial
analysis. When analysis recommenced there was a noticeable patterning
in the plant composition and this has been maintained over the period
to the present. The botanical diversity has evolved strongly, with the
greatest diversity now being found on the farmyard manure and phosphate-treated
plots. These plots also have the largest number of broadleaf specties
(and the acid plots (7 and 11) the fewest). The differences in the mineral
content of the broadleaf and grass species may help to explain the differences
noted in the willingness of the stock to eat the herbage.
Simplified botanical composition
of the plots in 1984 based on the Domin scale (Shimwell, 1971) and the
diversity for the same year.
Plot |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
Agrostis tenuis |
- |
- |
- |
4 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
Alopecurus pratensis |
4 |
5 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
- |
- |
Anthoxanthum odoratum |
4 |
- |
5 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
6 |
Bromus mollis |
6 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
1 |
- |
Cerastium holosteoides |
3 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
1 |
1 |
Cynosurus cristatus |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Festuca spp. |
3 |
- |
2 |
4 |
3 |
8 |
5 |
Holcus spp. |
6 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
7 |
6 |
6 |
Lolium perenne |
8 |
8 |
6 |
7 |
7 |
- |
- |
Plantago lanceolata |
- |
- |
- |
- |
3 |
5 |
- |
Trifolium spp. |
- |
- |
- |
- |
4 |
3 |
- |
Shannon Weiner index. |
2.43 |
2.31 |
2.03 |
2.12 |
2.16 |
1.67 |
1.67 |
Plot |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
Agrostis tenuis |
- |
5 |
4 |
8 |
5 |
4 |
Alopecurus pratensis |
1 |
- |
- |
- |
1 |
1 |
Anthoxanthum odoratum |
4 |
2 |
5 |
6 |
3 |
5 |
Bromus mollis |
1 |
- |
- |
- |
1 |
1 |
Cerastium holosteoides |
4 |
- |
- |
- |
2 |
1 |
Cynosurus cristatus |
6 |
- |
1 |
- |
5 |
1 |
Festuca spp. |
5 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
4 |
4 |
Holcus spp. |
3 |
4 |
5 |
- |
4 |
9 |
Lolium perenne |
6 |
- |
3 |
- |
5 |
3 |
Plantago lanceolata |
5 |
3 |
2 |
- |
4 |
- |
Trifolium spp. |
5 |
3 |
2 |
- |
4 |
- |
Shannon Weiner index. |
2.45 |
1.7 |
2.12 |
1.55 |
2.59 |
1.99 |
Beware! the botanical analysis publisnhed in Arnold et al.
(1976) contains and error for the numbering of the plots ignores the guard
area next tot the road. To interpret this correctly subtract 1 from the
number of the plots (plot 7 is really plot 6).

|