Control of erosion, and all of its after effects, from increased surface drainage and erosion to the formation of karst, is one of the essential problems when undertaking recultivation following necessary interventions in the sub-alpine and alpine vegetation stage (high zones). Average slope inclinations of 30-45% in the vicinity of ski runs, and far above in areas of natural erosion and avalanche zones, make restoration processes with sufficient erosion protection the prerequisite for success. Only a sufficient vegetation development of more than 70% ground cover stabilises the topsoil in the long term and reduces soil erosion to an acceptable degree. From 1999 to 2002, an international EU project with the participation Centre Raumberg-Gumpenstein (AREC) on five different Alpine sites at altitudes from 1,245 to 2,350 m above sea level. The aim of the work was the formulation of practicerelevant requirements for recultivation following intervention in high zones, especially following constructional measures in the vicinity of ski runs and lifts, torrent-and avalanche barriers. In a statistical comparison, the relationship between restoration techniques, seed mixtures of differing ecological value and vegetation cover was observed. The influence of application technique on erosion processes after restoration was obvious for the first two vegetation periods. Only with the additional use of mulch covers could increase surface drainage and noticeable soil loss be avoided. At high altitudes, the choice of seed mixture, irrespective of whether rapid or slow growing and independent of the extent of accompanying fertilisation, had no significance in the first two vegetation periods following sowing. In the following growing seasons, however, higher cover values were obtained with site-specific seed mixtures at three of the five experimental sites. While few species of the commercial seed mixture showed satisfactory persistency, most of the grasses and in particular the alpine leguminosae of site-specific seed mixtures increased their share during the observation period. In the long-term, sufficient protection against erosion is only guaranteed by the use of stable, enduring and ecologically adapted species.

Arrhenatherion meadows are an endangered type of semi‐natural grassland in Europe, and their conservation and restoration is an important policy objective. Recent research has led to development of techniques for harvesting seed material from regional donor sites and strategies for re‐establishment of species‐rich grassland, but their practical application requires that consumers are guaranteed sufficient seed quality of directly harvested material. Methods for the evaluation of purity, thousand seed weight (TSW) and germination capacity were developed and tested, a pre‐condition to define the optimal seeding rate for this vegetation type (2000–3000 seeds m−2). The assessment was based on seed obtained by two harvesting techniques: on‐site threshing (OST) and seed stripping (SS). Materials from both methods obtained 63% pure seeds. The TSW differed significantly between harvesting methods: the OST provided greater seed weight (1·057 g) than the SS (0·84 g). Two trials were implemented to define criteria for the germination capacity test. Organic growing media obtained the best and most homogenous results in a first comparative germination test. In the second trial, different dormancy‐breaking treatments were compared, each with and without pre‐chilling, namely: addition of potassium nitrate (KNO3), addition of gibberellic acid (GA3) and without addition of chemicals (WA). The germination capacity of the treated variants KNO3, GA3 and pre‐chilling was lower than that for WA. The harvesting method significantly influenced quality and quantity of the seed material, whereas the substrate and dormancy‐breaking treatments had no effect.

Neither methodology nor guidelines are available for defining quality characteristics and storage conditions of seed material harvested from semi-natural grassland. Seeds from an Arrhenatherion meadow were harvested via on-site threshing and seed stripping. After determination of purity, thousand seed weight and pre-tests in a phytotron, germination-capacity trials were carried out in a greenhouse. The harvested seed material was stored for up to 3 years under different conditions: (i) room temperature 18-23°C, (ii) cooling chamber (2-5°C with 40-50% humidity) and (iii) freezer (À18°C). There was a significant impact of the tested harvesting methods on seed separation, thousand seed weight and purity, but not on the germination capacity. Different storage conditions and storage length significantly influenced the germination capacity. There were also generally higher germination values for the seed-stripping material than the on-site threshing material (ca. 70 and 60%, respectively, in the first year). Germination capacity decreased significantly with time and was <15% after 3 years. We conclude that harvested seed material from semi-natural grassland should preferably be stored under cool conditions and used within 2 years.

No abstract

Questions:We investigated the transfer of seeds from species-rich grassland using green hay and seed material from on-site threshing to answer the following questions: do these two methods differ in terms of restoration success; and how do the two methods behave in their long-term effect concerning species composition and species presence? Location: Styria, Austria. Methods:We harvested seed material of a species-rich Arrhenatherion meadow by green hay and on-site threshing and transferred it to a receptor site. Transferable species were identified by vegetation survey and seed sample analyses. We analysed transfer rates and vegetation cover for the donor site species pool and Arrhenatherion target species, covering a 10-year observation period. Species composition and presence were derived from plant surveys. Results:The restoration success of both methods was similar within the observation period. Although donor site species declined, the establishment of target species was satisfactory and species-rich grassland was successfully established, despite different site conditions between donor and receptor sites and strong dynamics in species composition over time. Conclusions:Both harvesting methods are well suited for restoring species-rich grassland, and the actual choice ultimately depends on the costs and the given circumstances. Even if donor and receptor site differ in their site conditions, species-rich grassland can be established successfully. The prerequisite for this is that: (a) a high proportion of transferred species is able to establish; and (b) specific restoration goals do not exclude vegetation development according to specific receptor site conditions.