Evaluation of Herbicides for Restoring Native Grasses in Buffelgrass‐Dominated Grasslands

Tjelmeland, Aaron D.; Fulbright, Timothy E.; Lloyd-Reilley, John

doi:10.1111/j.1526-100x.2007.00269.x

Cited by 27 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Management options include the related objectives of counteracting the ecological novelties that confer advantage on alien species (for example, through increasing forest cover levels), reducing propagule pressure (for example, through timing of fire management activities) and creating disturbance regimes that favour the native community or disadvantage alien grasses. To date most attention has been on restoration (Daehler and Goergen 2005;Tjelmeland et al 2008;Brooks et al 2010); however, beyond localised asset protection, it remains unrealistic for extensive and remote conservation lands, and may also not in itself lead to the stable recovery of ecosystems (Reid et al 2009). In these cases, disturbance management, biocontrol and possibly the application of new genetic approaches such as CRISPR-based gene drive technology (Webber et al 2015) offer the greatest hope.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Current literature offers numerous hypotheses and predictors of invasion success, especially concerning the demographic consequences of species traits, environment and their interactions (Colautti et al 2006;Richardson and Pyšek 2006;Catford et al 2009;van Kleunen et al 2010;Gurevitch et al 2011). However, invasiveness is generally not a good predictor of impact (Ricciardi and Cohen 2007;van Klinken et al 2013): ruderal species, for example, can be highly invasive yet may cause little environmental impact (van Klinken et al 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Unassisted invasions: understanding and responding to Australia’s high-impact environmental grass weeds

Klinken

Friedel

2017

Aust. J. Bot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Alien grass species have been intentionally introduced into Australia since European settlement over 200 years ago, with many subsequently becoming weeds of natural environments. We have identified the subset of these weeds that have invaded and become dominant in environmentally important areas in the absence of modern anthropogenic disturbance, calling them 'high-impact species'. We also examined why these high-impact species were successful, and what that might mean for management. Seventeen high-impact species were identified through literature review and expert advice; all had arrived by 1945, and all except one were imported intentionally, 16 of the 17 were perennial and four of the 17 were aquatic. They had become dominant in diverse habitats and climates, although some environments still remain largely uninvaded despite apparently ample opportunities. Why these species succeeded remains largely untested, but evidence suggests a combination of ecological novelty (both intended at time of introduction and unanticipated), propagule pressure (through high reproductive rate and dominance in nearby anthropogenically-disturbed habitats) and an ability to respond to, and even alter, natural disturbance regimes (especially fire and inundation). Serious knowledge gaps remain for these species, but indications are that resources could be better focused on understanding and managing this limited group of high-impact species. They require new management approaches, especially to counteract the advantages of ecological novelty, reduce propagule pressure and better direct the large-scale disturbance regimes that continue to shape plant communities across Australia.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unassisted invasions: understanding and responding to Australia’s high-impact environmental grass weeds

Klinken

Friedel

2017

Aust. J. Bot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Buffelgrass (Pennisetum ciliare (L.) Link ¼ Cenchrus ciliaris L.), an invasive grass native from Africa to Southern Asia, is dominating undisturbed habitats and altering the grass/fire cycle in diverse habitats in Australia (Butler and Fairfax, 2003;Clarke et al, 2005;Low, 1997), Mexico (Arriaga et al, 2004;West and Nabhan, 2002), Texas (Tjelmeland et al, 2008), and Arizona (Burgess et al, 1991;Esque et al, 2004). Buffelgrass fits the grass/fire model well: In the Sonoran Desert of southwestern North America, it is invading areas with relatively sparse continuous fuels where fire is nearly absent and native plants and animals have few adaptations to survive fire (Esque and Schwalbe, 2002;Humphrey, 1974;Rogers, 1986), thereby transforming fire-resistant deserts into fire-prone grasslands (Búrquez-Montijo et al, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Fire behavior characteristics of buffelgrass-fueled fires and native plant community composition in invaded patches

McDonald

McPherson

2011

Journal of Arid Environments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although buffelgrass can be effectively controlled with herbicides (Dixon, Dixon, and Barret 2002;Tjelmeland, Fulbright, and Lloyd-Reilley 2008), manual control by uprooting plants with hand tools remains a common treatment method. Manual removal avoids the need for certification to handle herbicides and can be performed at all stages of phenology.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uprooted buffelgrass thatch reduces buffelgrass seedling establishment

Jernigan

McClaran

Biedenbender

et al. 2016

Arid Land Research and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Buffelgrass (Pennisetum ciliare (L.) Link), a non-native perennial bunchgrass, invades ecologically intact areas of the Sonoran Desert. It competitively excludes native plants and increases fire frequency and intensity. Since the 1990s, whole buffelgrass plants have been manually uprooted and removed to control the invasion in southern Arizona. Uprooting plants results in bare, disturbed soil which promotes buffelgrass seed germination. This study examined whether leaving entire uprooted buffelgrass plants (thatch) on a field site reduces future buffelgrass establishment compared to removing uprooted plants from the site. A secondary goal was to determine whether light reduction and autoallelopathy were major factors in the negative effect of thatch on buffelgrass seedling density. Field plots with an average of 8,095 kg/ha thatch had 1.9 buffelgrass seedlings/m 2 which was significantly fewer than the 2.9 seedlings/m 2 in plots without thatch. Thatched portions of thatch plots (50% of their total area) had only 0.7 seedlings/m 2 . In the greenhouse, which reduced outdoor light intensity by 35.2%, buffelgrass seeds sown in bare soil resulted in significantly higher seedling density than beneath buffelgrass thatch. Potential autoallelopathic chemicals leached from partially decomposed buffelgrass thatch and leached thatch had an intermediate but not significant (p ¼ 0.09) effect on seedling numbers. Results suggest that leaving uprooted buffelgrass plants has the benefit of reducing seedling establishment in the area disturbed by uprooting. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Evaluation of Herbicides for Restoring Native Grasses in Buffelgrass‐Dominated Grasslands

Cited by 27 publications

References 23 publications

Unassisted invasions: understanding and responding to Australia’s high-impact environmental grass weeds

Unassisted invasions: understanding and responding to Australia’s high-impact environmental grass weeds

Fire behavior characteristics of buffelgrass-fueled fires and native plant community composition in invaded patches

Uprooted buffelgrass thatch reduces buffelgrass seedling establishment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About