Blazing and grazing: influences of fire and bison on tallgrass prairie stream water quality

Larson, Danelle M.; Grudzinski, Bartosz; Dodds, Walter K.; Daniels, Melinda D.; Skibbe, Adam M.; Joern, Anthony

doi:10.1899/12-118.1

Cited by 25 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on numerous long-term studies at KPBS, we are confident that these different management practices did not have a significant influence on the variables measured in the experimental reaches. Bison, unlike cattle, have minimal impacts on streams (Fritz et al 1999, Larson et al 2013, and the spring prescribed burn on K02A did not significantly alter riparian vegetation. Riparian zones at KPBS often do not burn during prescribed burning.…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 88%

Effects of experimental forest removal on macroinvertebrate production and functional structure in tallgrass prairie streams

Vandermyde

Whiles

2015

Freshwater Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Encroachment by woody vegetation is a major threat to tallgrass prairie streams, and converts them from open-to closed-canopy systems. This change presumably shifts the relative importance of basal resources from autochthonous to allochthonous and may alter functional feeding group composition and production of consumers. Riparian trees were removed from 2 headwater stream reaches on the Konza Prairie Biological Station to examine effects of forest encroachment and removal. Removal reaches were compared to reaches with naturally open and closed canopies before and after manipulation. Benthic organic matter and macroinvertebrates were sampled monthly for 1 y before (year 1) and after (year 2) riparian forest removal. Total secondary production in removal reaches ranged from 8.9 to 10.2 g ash-free dry mass (AFDM) m −2 y −1 in year 1, and increased significantly to 13.4 to 14.5 g AFDM m −2 y −1 in year 2. Scraper production in removal reaches was 2.8 to 3.9 g AFDM m −2 y −1 in year 1, and increased significantly to 6.0 to 8.7 g AFDM m −2 y −1 in year 2. Shredders did not respond negatively to the removal, but scrapers dominated production (45-60% of total) in open and removal reaches after manipulation. Total production in naturally open reaches was 7.6 to 12.6 g AFDM m −2 y −1 in year 1 and decreased to 6.5 to 9.8 g AFDM m −2 y −1 in year 2. Riparian forest removal altered macroinvertebrate production and functional structure, but higher production in removal reaches than in open reaches after manipulation suggested that natural conditions were not restored 1 y after removal. However, ordinations indicated communities in open and removal reaches became more similar after manipulation. Forest encroachment alters prairie stream structure and function, and riparian forest removal may be an effective restoration and management practice for remaining prairie streams.Prairie habitats once covered ∼162 million ha of North America, but most were significantly altered for agriculture, resulting in <5% of intact prairie remaining (Samson and Knopf 1994). Reduced native ungulate grazing and decreases in fire frequency and intensity in the last century have resulted in the encroachment of native woody species on the few remaining prairie remnants, particularly along riparian corridors. In some regions, fire suppression has resulted in complete conversion to closed-canopy forest in as little as 35 y (Hoch and Briggs 1999). These changes in riparian vegetation ultimately result in a shift from open-to closed-canopy conditions. Riparian vegetation strongly influences the chemical and physical attributes of streams, ultimately affecting ecosystem structure and function (Vannote et al. 1980, Gregory et al. 1991. Historically, because of the frequency of wildfires, ungulate grazing, and hydrological patterns, headwater tallgrass prairie streams were bordered by relatively short riparian prairie vegetation (e.g., grasses, forbs, and shrubs) and characterized as open-canopy systems Dodds 1998, Dodds et al. 2004). These conditions res...

show abstract

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 88%

Effects of experimental forest removal on macroinvertebrate production and functional structure in tallgrass prairie streams

Vandermyde

Whiles

2015

Freshwater Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, fire can be more catastrophic with respect to sediment and nutrient input to streams in forested and desert systems because much grassland biomass is below ground, meristems are protected, stem densities are high (many small stems), and fibrous root morphology is common. Subsequently, grasslands recover very quickly after fire, and sediments and nutrients are held in place (Dodds et al 1996, Larson et al 2013b. In contrast, fires in deserts and dry shrublands remove already sparse vegetation (assuming vegetation is dense enough to carry fire), which can take a long time to regenerate, leading to runoff events across exposed soil (Malmon et al 2007).…”

Section: Interactions With Other Factors Influencing Geomorphologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Potential differences between native (e.g., bison, or the large grazing communities of the African savannas) and nonnative (e.g., cattle) grazer effects on stream geomorphology are not well understood. Bison increase bare sediments from pawing and wallowing, but minimally increase suspended sediments in tallgrass prairie streams (Larson et al 2013b). Cattle grazing can increase sediment concentrations and affect macroinvertebrate diversity in Mongolian Steppe streams (Hayford and Gelhaus 2010).…”

Section: Interactions With Other Factors Influencing Geomorphologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The effects of bison grazing on water quality in intact tallgrass prairie streams are moderate (Dodds et al 1996, Larson et al 2013b). Kemp and Dodds (2001) observed an ∼50% increase in total N content in stream water following introduction of modest densities of bison on the Konza Prairie Biological Station in eastern Kansas.…”

Section: Ecosystem Properties Across Biome Gradients Nutrientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Stream Biome Gradient Concept: factors controlling lotic systems across broad biogeographic scales

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose the Stream Biome Gradient Concept as a way to predict macroscale biological patterns in streams. This concept is based on the hypothesis that many abiotic and biotic features of streams change predictably along climate (temperature and precipitation) gradients because of direct influences of climate on hydrology, geomorphology, and interactions mediated by terrestrial vegetation. The Stream Biome Gradient Concept generates testable hypotheses related to continental variation among streams worldwide and allows aquatic scientists to understand how results from one biome might apply to a less-studied biome. Some predicted factors change monotonically across the biome/climate gradients, whereas others have maxima or minima in the central portion of the gradient. For example, predictions across the gradient from drier deserts through grasslands to wetter forests include more permanent flow, less bare ground, lower erosion and sediment transport rates, decreased importance of autochthonous C inputs to food webs, and greater stream animal species richness. In contrast, effects of large ungulate grazers on streams are expected to be greater in grasslands than in forests or deserts, and fire is expected to have weaker effects in grassland streams than in desert and forest streams along biome gradients with changing precipitation and constant latitude or elevation. Understanding historic patterns among biomes can help describe the evolutionary template at relevant biogeographic scales, can be used to broaden other conceptual models of stream ecology, and could lead to better management and conservation across the broadest scales.

show abstract

“…Stream networks were delineated automatically based on hillslope contributing area from a digital elevation model, using ArcGIS (version 10.1, ESRI, Redlands, California) software and accuracy was verified in the field. The riparian areas from each stream were surveyed from the base of the watershed to the point where the stream channel became vegetated and terminated into hillslope (Larson et al ., ) in the summer of 2013 from July 3rd to July 17th. Significant bare ground patches were located within riparian areas, near fences enclosing the ungulates, and along ridges separating treatment watersheds, thus we grouped these areas as “attractants.” In order to capture the high concentrations of bare ground along these features, a 10 m riparian buffer (10 m on each side of the stream) and a 50 m fence and watershed boundary buffer (50 m on both sides for the watershed boundary and 50 m on the inside of the fence line) were created in ArcGIS (version 10.1).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Bison and cattle grazing management, bare ground coverage, and links to suspended sediment concentrations in grassland streams

Grudzinski

Daniels

Anibas

et al. 2015

J American Water Resour Assoc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study quantified the impact of bison and cattle grazing management practices on bare ground coverage at the watershed, riparian, and forested riparian scales within the Flint Hills ecoregion in Kansas. We tested for correlations between bare ground coverage and fluvial suspended sediment concentrations during base‐flow and storm‐flow events. We used remotely sensed imagery combined with field surveys to classify ground cover and quantify the presence of bare ground. Base‐flow water samples were collected bi‐monthly during rain‐free periods and 24 h following precipitation events. Storm‐flow water samples were collected on the rising limb of the hydrograph, using single‐stage automatic samplers. Ungrazed treatments contained the lowest coverage of bare ground at the watershed, riparian, and forested riparian scales. Bison treatments contained the highest coverage of bare ground at the watershed scale, while high‐density cattle treatments contained the highest coverage of bare ground at the riparian and forested riparian scales. In bison and cattle‐grazed treatments, a majority of bare ground was located near fence lines, watershed boundaries, and third‐ and fourth‐order stream segments. Inorganic sediment concentrations at base flow were best predicted by riparian bare ground coverage, while storm‐flow sediment concentrations were best predicted by watershed scale bare ground coverage.

show abstract

Blazing and grazing: influences of fire and bison on tallgrass prairie stream water quality

Cited by 25 publications

References 35 publications

Effects of experimental forest removal on macroinvertebrate production and functional structure in tallgrass prairie streams

Effects of experimental forest removal on macroinvertebrate production and functional structure in tallgrass prairie streams

The Stream Biome Gradient Concept: factors controlling lotic systems across broad biogeographic scales

Bison and cattle grazing management, bare ground coverage, and links to suspended sediment concentrations in grassland streams

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About