Search

Since grasslands provide many ecosystem services, there are often different opinions on their management (e.g., agronomy, ecology, botany). Multidisciplinary research on this topic is therefore needed. This article focuses on the impact of ecological conditions, functional groups, ecological strategies, floristic composition (through habitat preference of species), major floristic gradients (presented as first two NMDS axes), and the management on forage quality. We estimated the forage quality using indicator values. All of the available vegetation plots in the region on wet and mesic meadows, managed pastures, and tall-herb meadow/pasture fringes on deeper or shallower soils (i.e., grasslands) were collected, organized in a database, and elaborated according to standard procedure. We used a widely accepted grassland classification system that uses floristic composition to define grassland types. Based on an NMDS ordination diagram and according to functional groups, ecological strategies, and habitat preferences (behavior of species) and management, we defined three major groups: mesic meadows (mowed), wet meadows (mowed), and pastures (grazed). We correlated all groups’ functional groups, ecological strategies, habitat preferences (behavior of species), major floristic gradients, management, and forage quality. We found that forage quality mainly depends on moisture conditions and that nutrients and grazing are less important. Within the grasslands under consideration, mesic meadows and mesic pastures have the highest forage quality.