Landscape context and site history, including antecedent site conditions, may constrain restoration potential despite the efforts of restoration practitioners. However, few experimental studies have investigated the relative importance of antecedent site conditions and the intensity of on‐site management in driving restoration outcomes. We established small‐scale prairie restoration experiments within the Lost Mound Unit of the Upper Mississippi River National Wildlife and Fish Refuge in Illinois, U.S.A. We investigated the effectiveness of two restoration treatments, herbicide application and seeding of native plants, on removal of invasive crown‐vetch (Securigera varia) and recovery of sand prairie plant communities. We replicated treatment plots across 15 locations with three levels of antecedent condition and fire treatment (burned, undegraded; burned, degraded; and unburned, degraded) to determine whether antecedent condition constrained the effectiveness of on‐site restoration. Two years after initial herbicide application crown‐vetch cover was significantly reduced relative to untreated controls. This effect was more pronounced in plots treated twice with herbicide. However, removal of crown‐vetch facilitated invasion by Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis). Addition of native prairie seed had little effect on restoration outcomes, regardless of herbicide application. Native community recovery was greater in plots restored in less degraded locations. Herbicide application tended to increase native species cover, but importantly, this effect was significant only in the least degraded locations. Intensive restoration management conducted in degraded landscapes can result in undesirable outcomes such as secondary species invasion. Reestablishment of native species following restoration is more likely where the surrounding remnant communities are intact.

To the User:Element Stewardship Abstracts (ESAs) are prepared to provide The Nature Conservancy's Stewardship staff and other land managers with current management-related information on those species and communities that are most important to protect, or most important to control. The abstracts organize and summarize data from numerous sources including literature and researchers and managers actively working with the species or community.We hope, by providing this abstract free of charge, to encourage users to contribute their information to the abstract. This sharing of information will benefit all land managers by ensuring the availability of an abstract that contains up-to-date information on management techniques and knowledgeable contacts. Contributors of information will be acknowledged within the abstract and receive updated editions. To contribute information, contact the editor whose address is listed at the end of the document.For ease of update and retrievability, the abstracts are stored on computer at the national office of The Nature Conservancy. This abstract is a compilation of available information and is not an endorsement of particular practices or products.Please do not remove this cover statement from the attached abstract.Authors of this Abstract: N. Sather, MRO © THE NATURE CONSERVANCY

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract