System Analysis to Improve Wetland Water Allocation at the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge, Utah

Alminagorta, Omar; Rosenberg, David E.; Kettenring, Karin M.

doi:10.1061/41114(371)264

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Multiple ecological models have supported recommendations for managers to target small, outlier patches of invasive species, which most efficiently reduces invader spread and is more cost effective (Moody and Mack, 1988; Higgins et al, 2000; Taylor and Hastings, 2004). One Phragmites -specific model offered evidence that prioritizing small patches of Phragmites is more effective for reducing spread (Alminagorta Cabezas, 2015), explained by Phragmites ’ ability to rapidly expand vegetatively (Kettenring et al, 2016), and the larger edge to area ratios of small patches. Regardless, large patches of Phragmites are often targeted, though this may not be the best method to reduce Phragmites cover at the landscape scale.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Abiotic and Landscape Factors Constrain Restoration Outcomes Across Spatial Scales of a Widespread Invasive Plant

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The natural recolonization of native plant communities following invasive species management is notoriously challenging to predict, since outcomes can be contingent on a variety of factors including management decisions, abiotic factors, and landscape setting. The spatial scale at which the treatment is applied can also impact management outcomes, potentially influencing plant assembly processes and treatment success. Understanding the relative importance of each of these factors for plant community assembly can help managers prioritize patches where specific treatments are likely to be most successful. Here, using effects size analyses, we evaluate plant community responses following four invasive Phragmites australis management treatments (1: fall glyphosate herbicide spray, 2: summer glyphosate herbicide spray, 3: summer imazapyr herbicide spray, 4: untreated control) applied at two patch scales (12,000 m 2 and 1,000 m 2 ) and monitored for 5 years. Using variation partitioning, we then evaluated the independent and shared influence of patch scale, treatment type, abiotic factors, and landscape factors on plant community outcomes following herbicide treatments. We found that Phragmites reinvaded more quickly in large patches, particularly following summer herbicide treatments, while native plant cover and richness increased at a greater magnitude in small patches than large. Patch scale, in combination with abiotic and landscape factors, was the most important driver for most plant responses. Compared with the small plots, large patches commonly had deeper and more prolonged flooding, and were in areas with greater hydrologic disturbance in the landscape, factors associated with reduced native plant recruitment and greater Phragmites cover. Small patches were associated with less flooding and landscape disturbance, and more native plants in the surrounding landscape than large patches, factors which promoted higher native plant conservation values and greater native plant cover and richness. Herbicide type and timing accounted for very little of the variation in native plant recovery, emphasizing the greater importance of patch selection for better management outcomes. To maximize the success of treatment programs, practitioners should first manage Phragmites patches adjacent to native plant species and in areas with minimal hydrologic disturbance.

show abstract