Efficacy of Exotic Control Strategies for Restoring Coastal Prairie Grasses

Holl, Karen D.; Howard, Elizabeth; Brown, Timothy M.; Chan, Robert G.; Silva, Tara S. de; Mann, E. Tyler; Russell, Jamie A.; Spangler, William H.

doi:10.1614/ipsm-d-14-00031.1

Cited by 24 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…; Holl et al. ). Non‐native forbs are most effectively controlled by herbicide when actively allocating resources to both above‐ and below‐ground tissues and before flowering and seed set occurs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Two early spring herbicide applications when grasses were establishing and putting resources into shoot production may reduce non-native grasses more with less harm to native forbs than in July when grasses, and forbs, are at peak production. Although non-native grass cover and flowering were reduced following treatment, other research has shown the effect may be temporary and repeated control required over the longer term (Rice et al 1997;Holl et al 2014). Non-native forbs are most effectively controlled by herbicide when actively allocating resources to both above-and belowground tissues and before flowering and seed set occurs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Thus longevity of treatment effects for grasses and forbs should continue to be evaluated, as results to date are not conclusive. The effects of herbicide are often shortlived, so repeated herbicide application has been recommended for every 2-3 yr to prevent reinvasion (Holl et al 2014). We only recommend this for heavily invaded sites, and suggest spot spraying may be a less detrimental alternative for native species.…”

Section: Non-native Grassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Glyphosate, steam and cutting for non‐native plant control in Alberta fescue grassland restoration

Stover

Naeth

Wilkinson

2017

Applied Vegetation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Question What are the effects of cutting, glyphosate application and steam application on abundance and diversity of non‐native grasses and forbs and non‐target native grasses and forbs in restoration of a complex disturbed fescue grassland? Location Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta, Canada. Methods Cutting, glyphosate application and steam application treatments were implemented at three disturbed sites in an incomplete block design with a control. Plant communities were evaluated for four growing seasons, one before and three after management treatment implementation. Results Glyphosate reduced non‐native grass cover for three growing seasons following application and non‐native forbs for one growing season. Glyphosate led to significant increases in non‐native forb cover, more than double pre‐existing values 2 and 3 yr after application. Native species abundance and diversity were more negatively impacted by glyphosate on sites with higher abundance and diversity prior to management treatments. Low frequency cutting over 2 yr did not consistently control non‐native species, steam reduced non‐native grass cover at the most heavily invaded site. Conclusions Site‐specific conditions must be considered to develop effective control methods for non‐native species. No treatment effectively re‐established native grassland communities. Glyphosate application reduced non‐native grasses, but not non‐native forbs. When native forbs were abundant prior to management, glyphosate reduced them. Steam may have potential and should be further investigated. This is one of only a few studies to investigate methods to manage multiple non‐native species occurring with native species, rather than management of a single undesirable species, and is the first to assess steam as a management option for native grasslands.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Non-native Grassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Glyphosate, steam and cutting for non‐native plant control in Alberta fescue grassland restoration

Stover

Naeth

Wilkinson

2017

Applied Vegetation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Restoration practitioners have found that native grasslands are more challenging to restore than shrub‐dominated habitats (Holl et al. , Kimball et al. ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resistance and resilience: ten years of monitoring shrub and prairie communities in Orange County, CA, USA

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mediterranean‐climate natural systems have high ecological value, yet the extent of their cover has diminished greatly due to changes in land use. Other stressors, ranging from intense short‐term disturbances such as wildfire to more gradual events such as extended drought and continuous pressures including competition with invasive species, test the resistance and resilience of community composition and structure. Data from long‐term monitoring provided an opportunity to evaluate the responses of three Southern California plant communities (chaparral, coastal sage scrub, and grassland) to disturbances. We analyzed ten years of point intercept and quadrat data from Orange County to describe trends through time and assess community resistance and resilience. We found that grassland communities, which were more degraded from the start of our study, were generally resistant to change. Chaparral was also fairly resistant to disturbance, while coastal sage scrub exhibited more variation, with some transects exhibiting more resilience than others. Transects with fewer native shrubs experienced less of a decline in shrub cover during drought than those with dense shrubs. Grasslands had the lowest native diversity. There were increases in native diversity in years with more precipitation that were preceded by dry years. There was a decline in native perennial bunchgrasses during our monitoring. Our analyses demonstrated the resilience of native shrub cover to fire and the susceptibility (low resistance) of dense native shrubs and native grasses to drought and increases in non‐native species. We encourage academic ecologists to embrace diverse data sources available for hypothesis testing, especially monitoring efforts associated with regulatory purposes, to advance the goal of understanding long‐term dynamics.

show abstract

“…As a result, many studies have documented the significant independent and interactive effects of invasion and cattle grazing (e.g. Harrison et al ; Kimball & Schiffman ), and site and soil conditions (Lulow et al ; Holl et al ) for restoration outcomes in California grasslands. Characteristics of seeded species, such as identity (Lulow et al ; Wilson ) and year planted (Young et al ), are also commonly invoked as important for restoration success in California, due to effects of annual weather variation on invasive plant cover.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Invasive species cover, soil type, and grazing interact to predict long‐term grassland restoration success

Gornish

Santos

2015

Restoration Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grasslands are undergoing tremendous degradation as a result of climate change, land use, and invasion by non‐native plants. However, understanding of the factors responsible for driving reestablishment of grassland plant communities is largely derived from short‐term studies. In order to develop an understanding of the factors responsible for longer term restoration outcomes in California annual grasslands, we surveyed 12 fields in Davis, CA, U.S.A., in 2015 that were seeded with native species mixtures starting in 2004. Using field surveys, we investigated how invasive plant richness and cover, native plant richness and cover, aboveground biomass, grazing, soil type, and restoration species identity might provide utility for explaining patterns of restoration success. We found a negative relationship between invasive cover and restoration cover, which was attributed to the slow establishment of seeded species and subsequent dominance by weeds. The relationship between invasive cover and restoration cover was modified by grazing, likely due to a change in the dominance of exotic forbs, which have a more similar growing season to restoration species, and therefore compete more strongly for late season moisture. Finally, we found that soil type was responsible for differences in the identity and abundance of invasive plants, subsequently affecting restoration cover. This work highlights the value of focusing resources on reducing invasive species cover, limiting grazing to periods of adequate moisture, and considering soil type for successful long‐term restoration in California annual grasslands. Moreover, observations of long‐term restoration outcomes can provide insight into the way mechanisms driving restoration outcomes might differ through time.

show abstract

Efficacy of Exotic Control Strategies for Restoring Coastal Prairie Grasses

Cited by 24 publications

References 43 publications

Glyphosate, steam and cutting for non‐native plant control in Alberta fescue grassland restoration

Glyphosate, steam and cutting for non‐native plant control in Alberta fescue grassland restoration

Resistance and resilience: ten years of monitoring shrub and prairie communities in Orange County, CA, USA

Invasive species cover, soil type, and grazing interact to predict long‐term grassland restoration success

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About