SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

FilenameFormatSizeDescription
jane12165-sup-0001FigS1-S8-TableS1-S3.docWord document1121K

Fig. S1. A diagram showing the four experimental treatments and graphical representation of results of the experimental manipulations.

Fig. S2. A figure showing variation of water content in 0–20 cm layer during the field experiment.

Fig. S3. A graphical representation and a photograph showing the physical setting of the field experiment.

Fig. S4. A graphical representation and a photograph showing the physical setting of replicates in the glasshouse experiment.

Fig. S5. A figure showing variation of root mass in different layers at the end of the field experiment.

Fig. S6. A figure showing the difference in ratio of graminoid biomass/forb biomass among the four treatments [(i) high elevation, predator absent (H, −P), (ii) high elevation, predator present (H, +P), (iii) low elevation, predator absent (L, −P), and (iv) low elevation, predator present (L, +P)] in the field experiment.

Fig. S7. A figure showing the difference in soil properties including (a) soil total nitrogen concentrations, (b) total phosphorus concentrations, and (c) organic matter content for both upper and lower soil layers among the four treatments [(i) high elevation, predator absent (H, −P), (ii) high elevation, predator present (H, +P), (iii) low elevation, predator absent (L, −P), and (iv) low elevation, predator present (L, +P)] in the field experiment.

Fig. S8. A figure showing variation of tunnel number among the four treatments [(i) high elevation, predator absent (H, −P), (ii) high elevation, predator present (H, +P), (iii) low elevation, predator absent (L, −P), and (iv) low elevation, predator present (L, +P)] in the first (a) and second (b) glasshouse experiment.

Table S1. The effect of patch elevation (E), predator (P), tunnelling beetle (T), and their interactions (E*P and E*T), and the on aboveground plant biomass in the primary experiment by using generalized linear model (GLM) with Poisson errors.

Table S2. The effect of patch elevation (E), predator (P), and their interactions (E*P) on the ratio of graminoid biomass/forb biomass, dung mass loss, number of living beetles, and soil properties including bulk density, water content, organic matter content, soluble N and P concentrations, and dung mass loss, soil total N and total P concentrations at the lower layer in the primary experiment; and tunnel number, mean tunnel depth and dry weight of tunnel dung in the first (G1) and second (G2) glasshouse experiments.

Table S3. The results of ordinary linear regression analyses of tunnel dung weight vs. tunnel depth, and immigration time vs. tunnel depth and tunnel dung weight in the first (G1; = 20) and second (G2; = 24) glasshouse experiments.

Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.