Post Burn Restoration Response of<i>Encelia virginensis</i>within a Small Wash System in the Mojave Desert

Devitt, D. A.; Landau, F.H.; Abella, Scott R.; Petrie, Matthew D.; McLuckie, Ann M.; Kellam, John O.

doi:10.3368/er.38.3.169

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The total failure of outplanting was unusual, as some outplant survival occurred in dozens of previous restoration experiments in North American (e.g. Edwards et al 2000;Glenn et al 2001;Devitt et al 2020) and global drylands (e.g. Commander et al 2013;Rathore et al 2015;Strohmeier et al 2021).…”

Section: Failure Of the Biotic Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biotic and abiotic treatments as a bet‐hedging approach to restoring plant communities and soil functions

Rader

Chiquoine

Weigand

et al. 2021

Restoration Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two related concepts in restoration ecology include the relative interchangeability of biotic and abiotic restoration treatments for initiating recovery and bet hedging using multiple restoration approaches to increase the likelihood of favorable restoration outcomes. We used these concepts as a framework to implement a factorial experiment including biotic (outplanting greenhouse-grown individuals of three perennial species) and abiotic treatments (constructing microtopography or vertical mulch consisting of upright, dead plant material). These treatments were designed to stimulate native plant recruitment and reverse soil degradation at four disturbed sites in the Sonoran Desert, U.S.A. The first growing season after the restoration treatments was the driest of the last 47 years, and 100% of outplants died. While the biotic treatment failed, the vertical mulch abiotic treatment increased native shrub seedling cover at the driest site and reversed soil loss across sites by increasing soil accumulation by 6Â to 2 cm/year. Results revealed that (1) inexpensive, minimal-input abiotic treatments outperformed resource-intensive biotic treatments; (2) the restoration effort withstood the total failure of a major component (outplanting) to nevertheless achieve key restoration benefits within 2-3 growing seasons; and (3) incorporating multiple treatment types served as a bet-hedging approach to buffer against treatment failures. Integrating minimal-input abiotic treatments in restoration warrants consideration given their low cost and bet-hedging potential.

show abstract