春季施药为一年生草入侵牧场的植被恢复提供了另一个机会窗口

IF 2.4 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY Rangeland Ecology & Management Pub Date : 2024-02-08 DOI:10.1016/j.rama.2024.01.002
K.W. Davies , V.M. Schroeder , D.D. Johnson , L.N. Svejcar , D.R. Clenet
{"title":"春季施药为一年生草入侵牧场的植被恢复提供了另一个机会窗口","authors":"K.W. Davies ,&nbsp;V.M. Schroeder ,&nbsp;D.D. Johnson ,&nbsp;L.N. Svejcar ,&nbsp;D.R. Clenet","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.01.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Invasive annual grasses have degraded tens of millions of hectares of the sagebrush ecosystem of western North America. Restoration of perennial vegetation in annual grass−invaded rangelands is a management priority to decrease fire risk, increase livestock forage quality, and improve wildlife habitat. Annual grasses are traditionally controlled in the fall with preemergent herbicides, such as imazapic, and treated areas are often seeded with perennial bunchgrasses 1 yr later to avoid nontarget herbicide damage to revegetation species. However, there is a limited window of time in the fall to accomplish annual grass control treatments. Spring-applied control treatments may be another option compared with only fall control treatments, but they have received little attention. We imposed spring-applied annual grass control treatments followed by fall seeding of a perennial bunchgrasses and then measured vegetation response for the next 3 yr in cheatgrass <em>(Bromus tectorum)</em> and medusahead <em>(Taeniatherum caput-medusae)</em>−invaded communities. Spring treatments that included imazapic application (at a low rate), followed by fall seeding of perennial bunchgrasses, successfully controlled annual grasses and substantially increased perennial bunchgrass cover and density. Spring burning and glyphosate herbicide application, without imazapic, were not successful in promoting substantial increases in perennial bunchgrass cover. Spring burning before imazapic application was the most successful treatment for rehabilitation seeding. By the third yr after seeding, perennial bunchgrass cover was 17% in the spring burn−imazapic treatment, greater than what is generally found in intact Wyoming big sagebrush (<em>Artemisia tridentata</em> ssp. <em>wyomingensis</em>)-bunchgrass communities in this region. The results of this study provide strong evidence that spring-applied control treatments including imazapic can be part of successful revegetation efforts, thereby decreasing some of the logistical challenges associated with revegetation of annual grass−invaded sagebrush rangelands.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"93 ","pages":"Pages 104-111"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1550742424000022/pdfft?md5=7e9aff434aac9b253171a3725cedc6d3&pid=1-s2.0-S1550742424000022-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Spring-Applied Treatments Offer Another Window of Opportunity for Revegetation of Annual Grass−Invaded Rangelands\",\"authors\":\"K.W. Davies ,&nbsp;V.M. Schroeder ,&nbsp;D.D. Johnson ,&nbsp;L.N. Svejcar ,&nbsp;D.R. Clenet\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rama.2024.01.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Invasive annual grasses have degraded tens of millions of hectares of the sagebrush ecosystem of western North America. Restoration of perennial vegetation in annual grass−invaded rangelands is a management priority to decrease fire risk, increase livestock forage quality, and improve wildlife habitat. Annual grasses are traditionally controlled in the fall with preemergent herbicides, such as imazapic, and treated areas are often seeded with perennial bunchgrasses 1 yr later to avoid nontarget herbicide damage to revegetation species. However, there is a limited window of time in the fall to accomplish annual grass control treatments. Spring-applied control treatments may be another option compared with only fall control treatments, but they have received little attention. We imposed spring-applied annual grass control treatments followed by fall seeding of a perennial bunchgrasses and then measured vegetation response for the next 3 yr in cheatgrass <em>(Bromus tectorum)</em> and medusahead <em>(Taeniatherum caput-medusae)</em>−invaded communities. Spring treatments that included imazapic application (at a low rate), followed by fall seeding of perennial bunchgrasses, successfully controlled annual grasses and substantially increased perennial bunchgrass cover and density. Spring burning and glyphosate herbicide application, without imazapic, were not successful in promoting substantial increases in perennial bunchgrass cover. Spring burning before imazapic application was the most successful treatment for rehabilitation seeding. By the third yr after seeding, perennial bunchgrass cover was 17% in the spring burn−imazapic treatment, greater than what is generally found in intact Wyoming big sagebrush (<em>Artemisia tridentata</em> ssp. <em>wyomingensis</em>)-bunchgrass communities in this region. The results of this study provide strong evidence that spring-applied control treatments including imazapic can be part of successful revegetation efforts, thereby decreasing some of the logistical challenges associated with revegetation of annual grass−invaded sagebrush rangelands.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49634,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rangeland Ecology & Management\",\"volume\":\"93 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 104-111\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1550742424000022/pdfft?md5=7e9aff434aac9b253171a3725cedc6d3&pid=1-s2.0-S1550742424000022-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rangeland Ecology & Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1550742424000022\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1550742424000022","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

入侵的一年生草导致北美西部数千万公顷的鼠尾草生态系统退化。为了降低火灾风险、提高牲畜饲料质量和改善野生动物栖息地,在受一年生草入侵的牧场恢复多年生植被是一项优先管理任务。传统的做法是在秋季用苗前除草剂(如咪草烟)控制一年生草,处理过的区域通常会在一年后播种多年生丛生草,以避免除草剂对重新植被物种造成非目标损害。不过,秋季完成一年生草控制处理的时间有限。与只在秋季进行控制处理相比,春季施药控制处理可能是另一种选择,但很少受到关注。我们在秋季播种多年生丛生禾本科植物后,实施了春季施用的一年生草控制处理,然后在接下来的 3 年里测量了受骗子草(Bromus tectorum)和medusahead(Taeniatherum caput-medusae)侵染的群落的植被反应。春季处理包括施用咪草烟(低剂量),然后在秋季播种多年生丛生草,成功控制了一年生草,并大大提高了多年生丛生草的覆盖率和密度。春季焚烧和施用草甘膦除草剂(不施用咪草烟)并不能成功地促进多年生丛生草覆盖率的大幅提高。在施用咪草烟之前进行春季焚烧是最成功的恢复性播种处理方法。播种后第三年,春季焚烧-咪草烟处理的多年生丛生草覆盖率为 17%,高于该地区完整的怀俄明大沙棘(Artemisia tridentata ssp. wyomingensis)-丛生草群落的覆盖率。这项研究的结果有力地证明,包括咪鲜胺在内的春季施用控制处理方法可以成为成功的重新植被工作的一部分,从而减少与受一年生草入侵的鼠尾草牧场重新植被相关的一些后勤挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Spring-Applied Treatments Offer Another Window of Opportunity for Revegetation of Annual Grass−Invaded Rangelands

Invasive annual grasses have degraded tens of millions of hectares of the sagebrush ecosystem of western North America. Restoration of perennial vegetation in annual grass−invaded rangelands is a management priority to decrease fire risk, increase livestock forage quality, and improve wildlife habitat. Annual grasses are traditionally controlled in the fall with preemergent herbicides, such as imazapic, and treated areas are often seeded with perennial bunchgrasses 1 yr later to avoid nontarget herbicide damage to revegetation species. However, there is a limited window of time in the fall to accomplish annual grass control treatments. Spring-applied control treatments may be another option compared with only fall control treatments, but they have received little attention. We imposed spring-applied annual grass control treatments followed by fall seeding of a perennial bunchgrasses and then measured vegetation response for the next 3 yr in cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) and medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae)−invaded communities. Spring treatments that included imazapic application (at a low rate), followed by fall seeding of perennial bunchgrasses, successfully controlled annual grasses and substantially increased perennial bunchgrass cover and density. Spring burning and glyphosate herbicide application, without imazapic, were not successful in promoting substantial increases in perennial bunchgrass cover. Spring burning before imazapic application was the most successful treatment for rehabilitation seeding. By the third yr after seeding, perennial bunchgrass cover was 17% in the spring burn−imazapic treatment, greater than what is generally found in intact Wyoming big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. wyomingensis)-bunchgrass communities in this region. The results of this study provide strong evidence that spring-applied control treatments including imazapic can be part of successful revegetation efforts, thereby decreasing some of the logistical challenges associated with revegetation of annual grass−invaded sagebrush rangelands.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Rangeland Ecology & Management
Rangeland Ecology & Management 农林科学-环境科学
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
13.00%
发文量
87
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: Rangeland Ecology & Management publishes all topics-including ecology, management, socioeconomic and policy-pertaining to global rangelands. The journal''s mission is to inform academics, ecosystem managers and policy makers of science-based information to promote sound rangeland stewardship. Author submissions are published in five manuscript categories: original research papers, high-profile forum topics, concept syntheses, as well as research and technical notes. Rangelands represent approximately 50% of the Earth''s land area and provision multiple ecosystem services for large human populations. This expansive and diverse land area functions as coupled human-ecological systems. Knowledge of both social and biophysical system components and their interactions represent the foundation for informed rangeland stewardship. Rangeland Ecology & Management uniquely integrates information from multiple system components to address current and pending challenges confronting global rangelands.
期刊最新文献
Table of Contents Evaluating the Sagebrush Conservation Design Strategy Through the Performance of a Sagebrush Indicator Species Defend and Grow the Core for Birds: How a Sagebrush Conservation Strategy Benefits Rangeland Birds The Carbon Security Index: A Novel Approach to Assessing How Secure Carbon Is in Sagebrush Ecosystems Within the Great Basin Crossing the Chasm: Using Technical Transfer to Bridge Science Production and Management Action
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1