2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-100x.2009.00616.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Successional Models as Guides for Restoration of Riparian Forest Understory

Abstract: We compare two successional models as guides for restoring native riparian understory species along a 160-km stretch of the Sacramento River in California. In 2001 and 2007, we surveyed cover, frequency, and richness of native and exotic understory species in 15 sites planted (1989)(1990)(1991)(1992)(1993)(1994)(1995)(1996) with overstory species to determine whether native understory species colonized naturally (passive relay floristics model). In 2007, we surveyed 20 additional sites (planted 1997-2003) in … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
50
0
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 62 publications
(56 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
3
50
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…plantations rather than nuclei) are likely to most rapidly reduce cover of shade-intolerant non-native species. However, invasive non-native species that can tolerate the shady conditions of a plantation understory are becoming more prevalent (McClain et al, 2011;Ostertag et al, 2008), making it more difficult to predict the impact of different planting designs on reducing non-native cover.…”
Section: Habitat Heterogeneitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…plantations rather than nuclei) are likely to most rapidly reduce cover of shade-intolerant non-native species. However, invasive non-native species that can tolerate the shady conditions of a plantation understory are becoming more prevalent (McClain et al, 2011;Ostertag et al, 2008), making it more difficult to predict the impact of different planting designs on reducing non-native cover.…”
Section: Habitat Heterogeneitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Successional dynamics in the restored sites include early successional weedy species for the first several years after restoration (Holl and Crone 2004), many of the same plants listed as weeds of concern by walnut growers (UCIPM 2007). These restored sites are managed for non‐native species 3 years after the initial restoration, after that time no management occurs in the restored habitats, leading to domination of non‐native early successional species (Holl & Crone 2004; McClain et al 2009). In contrast, remnant habitat has a lower availability of resources, such as light and nutrients, that are required by many of these weedy early successional species, and therefore a reduced abundance of weedy annual species (Holl & Crone 2004; McClain et al 2009).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Interior riparian forest plots were not sampled as our research was designed to capture differences among the sites in terms of adjacent land use and not specific dynamics within the adjacent habitat type. These dynamics within the restored and remnant habitats have been discussed in Holl and Crone (2004) and McClain et al (2009). At each point, I established a 1 × 1–m plot at a random distance between 0 and 5 m, and a random direction from the sample point.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most studies are based on successional models (McClain et al, 2011) with species of different ecological groups (Gonçalves et al, 2005;Pereira & Rodrigues, 2012) or by facilitating species (Beltrame & Rodrigues, 2008). However, according to Tilman (1988), in nutrient-deficient environments (such as disturbed and degraded environments), competition between species may be a determining factor for their establishment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%