Skip to main content

Table 1 Herbivore diversity contrasts considered in the systematic review, based on functional groups of herbivores (F1, F2, F3, and invertebrates [inv])

From: Herbivore diversity effects on Arctic tundra ecosystems: a systematic review

Numerical change

Identity of change

Herbivore diversity contrast

N of records

0

No contrast

F1, F2, F3 | F1, F2, F3

1(23)

F2 | F3

1(4)

F2, F3 | F2, F3

6(60)

F2, F3, inv | F2, F3, inv

2(19)

F3 | F3

2(9)

F3, inv | F3, inv

1(2)

inv | inv

3(16)

1

F1

F1 | zero

55(703)

F1, F2 | F2

2(16)

F2

F2 | zero

17(231)

F3

F2, F3 | F2

19(643)

F3 | zero

58(906)

F3, inv | inv

1(4)

inv

inv | zero

14(150)

2

F1 and F2

F1, F2 | zero

1(1)

F1 and F3

F1, F2, F3 | F2

1(41)

F1, F3 | zero

6(65)

F2 and F3

F2, F3 | zero

45(793)

3

F1, F2 and F3

F1, F2, F3, inv | inv

1(27)

  1. Functional groups were defined by [5] and represent: F1 limnic-habitat associated herbivores, migrating outside the Arctic for winter, with undifferentiated guts and feeding mainly on graminoids (waterfowl; paragon Anser anser); F2 immobile, burrowing species with hindgut fermenting digestive physiology (paragon Synaptomys borealis); and F3 large-bodied facultative-generalist species for which shrubs and lichens are an important diet component (paragon Lepus timidus). Numerical change indicates the difference in groups between high and low diversity areas reported in each study. Identity of change describes which group of herbivores differed between high and low diversity areas. Herbivore diversity contrast specifies the groups of herbivores present in high and low diversity areas (high | low). Number of records indicates how many articles and studies (in brackets) reported each type of contrast. Note that some articles and studies had “no contrast” even if they passed the eligibility criterion for comparator; studies with “no contrast” were not considered in further analyses