There is currently much interest in restoration ecology in identifying native vegetation that can decrease the invasibility by exotic species of environments undergoing restoration. However, uncertainty remains about restoration's ability to limit exotic species, particularly in deserts where facilitative interactions between plants are prevalent. Using candidate native species for restoration in the Mojave Desert of the southwestern U.S.A., we experimentally assembled a range of plant communities from early successional forbs to late-successional shrubs and assessed which vegetation types reduced the establishment of the priority invasive annuals Bromus rubens (red brome) and Schismus spp. (Mediterranean grass) in control and Nenriched soils. Compared to early successional grass and shrub and late-successional shrub communities, an early forb community best resisted invasion, reducing exotic species biomass by 88% (N added) and 97% (no N added) relative to controls (no native plants). In native species monocultures, Sphaeralcea ambigua (desert globemallow), an early successional forb, was the least invasible, reducing exotic biomass by 91%. However, the least-invaded vegetation types did not reduce soil N or P relative to other vegetation types nor was native plant cover linked to invasibility, suggesting that other traits influenced native-exotic species interactions. This study provides experimental field evidence that native vegetation types exist that may reduce exotic grass establishment in the Mojave Desert, and that these candidates for restoration are not necessarily latesuccessional communities. More generally, results indicate the importance of careful native species selection when exotic species invasions must be constrained for restoration to be successful.
The interactions between native and exotic species occur on a continuum from facilitative to competitive. A growing thrust in invasive species science is differentiating where particular native species occur along this continuum, with practical implications for identifying species that might reduce the invasibility of ecosystems. We used a greenhouse experiment to develop a competitive hierarchy of 27 native species with red brome, an invasive annual grass in the arid lands of the southwestern United States, and a field study to assess in situ responses of brome to native perennial species in the Mojave Desert. Native species most competitive with brome in the competition experiment included the annuals Esteve's pincushion and western fiddleneck and the perennials eastern Mojave buckwheat, sweetbush, and brittlebush, which reduced brome biomass to 49 to 70% of its grown-alone amount. There was no clear difference in competitive abilities with brome between annual and perennial natives, and competiveness was not strongly correlated (r = 0.15) with the biomass of the native species. In the field, sweetbush and brittlebush supported among the least cover of brome, suggesting congruence of the strong early competitive abilities of these species with in situ patterns of brome distribution. At the other extreme, brome attained its highest average cover (19%) below littleleaf ratany, significantly greater than all but 3 of the 16 species evaluated. Cover by brome was only weakly related (r = 0.19) to the area of the perennial canopy, suggesting that factors other than the sizes of perennial plants were linked to differences in brome cover among species. Results suggest that (1) interactions with brome differ substantially among native species, (2) these interactions are not as closely linked to biomass production as in more temperate regions, and (3) there is potential for identifying native species that can reduce invasion of desert ecosystems.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.