Randomized trial assesses soil and forest health driven by cattle grazing and logging in Nothofagus ecosystems, indicating vulnerability to degradation.
Soil and forest degradation driven by chronic land‐use pressures is an increasingly widespread process in forested landscapes worldwide, yet its empirical characterization remains limited, particularly in temperate and sub‐Antarctic ecosystems. We assess how cattle grazing and selective logging impact soil properties, understory plant communities, and tree regeneration in deciduous Nothofagus forests of Chilean Patagonia. We established 176 plots (25 × 20 m) in Nothofagus pumilio and N. antarctica forests distributed among protected areas and private properties. Cattle grazing intensity was quantified based on dung pat density, whereas selective logging intensity was estimated from stump density and basal area. Soil physical and chemical properties, understory plant communities, and tree regeneration were quantified in each plot. Multivariate responses were analyzed using PERMANOVA and non‐metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS), and generalized linear models (GLMs). Across both forest types, cattle grazing was consistently associated with increased soil bulk density, higher soil compaction, and reduced air capacity, indicating a primary role of soil physical degradation. Cattle grazing and selective logging significantly altered understory plant community composition, with increasing disturbance intensities promoting exotic species richness. In N. antarctica forests, sapling density declined markedly with increasing cattle grazing intensity and logging, revealing impaired regeneration under combined land‐use pressures. While N. pumilio forests appear relatively resilient under current disturbance levels, N. antarctica forests are particularly vulnerable. Our study highlights the importance of integrating below‐ and above‐ground indicators to improve the assessment of forest degradation and support sustainable management of temperate forest ecosystems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zamorano‐Elgueta et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: