SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Table S1. Estimates of total dry litter (g) added per 9 m2 (per plot) to addition treatment plots, to species. We performed the initial, large litter manipulation after the growing season ended in June 2005, and repeated it in late May?June 2006, though lower precipitation that year led to lower amounts of litter manipulated. In 2005 to bring pre-manipulation plots of low and high invasion levels to the same amount of litter (twice the naturally high abundance) we added twice as much litter to low invasion areas as to high invasion areas.

Table S2. One-way anova results for comparisons of High Invasion ? Control to High Invasion ? Removal Control show that effects of removal were not due to artifacts (trampling etc.) of manipulation. Litter N results are for Treatment main effect of a GLM that also included ?months in field.?

Table S3. Mean (?SE when available) values of g C m?2 aboveground, in soil and respired in other grassland and shrubland systems. For the cheatgrass invasion we converted soil %C values using a bulk density of 1.5 obtained for nearby study site (Jungo, NV, (United States Department of Agriculture: Natural Resource Conservation Service 2008)).

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

FilenameFormatSizeDescription
GCB_2001_sm_suppmat.doc101KSupporting info item

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.