The effects of management on vegetation trajectories during the early‐stage restoration of previously arable land after hay transfer

Abstract

The restoration of floodplain grasslands has benefited from many studies of the underlying mechanisms. Among the operational tools that resulted, hay transfer is now used increasingly to alleviate the effects of limited seed dispersal and recruitment. To improve this method, we still need to understand how it can affect restoration trajectories, and particularly their direction and magnitude during the early stages of restoration. Based on concepts from the field of community ecology theory, we investigated the effects of early‐stage management through grazing or mowing on restoration trajectories after soil harrowing and hay transfer. We established a randomized block design experiment and quantified several community‐related metrics to formalize restoration trajectories for 3 years after hay transfer on a previously arable alluvial island in southwestern France. Whatever the management treatment, the species richness and evenness were significantly higher in hay‐inoculated than in control plots. This effect was linked to the recruitment of species originating not only from the reference grassland through hay transfer, but also from the seed bank, a well‐known effect of soil harrowing. Although generally oriented toward the reference grassland, the origin, direction, and magnitude of the trajectory of hay‐inoculated plots all depended on the management applied. Sheep grazing applied at the same time as hay transfer enhanced the recruitment of reference species as from the first experimental year, because it controlled aboveground competition and maintained the window of opportunity open for a sufficiently longer period of time. Our findings show that the type of management applied simultaneously to hay transfer influences the origin of a grassland trajectory, while its direction and magnitude are dependent on the management applied in subsequent years. Grazing immediately after hay transfer may be appropriate to accelerate the recruitment of species from the reference grassland.

Green hay transfer for grassland restoration: species capture and establishment

“…Another way to promote the establishment of species that might not germinate efficiently soon after sowing, that would not require additional sowing alongside the application of green hay, would be to further extend the window of opportunity, for example by heavy grazing soon after green hay transfer (Garrouj et al 2019). Alternatively, the window could be reopened, for example by creating additional bare ground, possibly in the first spring after hay application, when transferred seed characterized by primary seed dormancy has experienced natural cold stratification.…”

Canopy composition and drought shape understorey plant assemblages in a young tree diversity experiment

“…As observed in Atlantic forests, decades are not sufficient to restore nontree vegetation, likely due to landscape and dispersal filters (Garcia, et al 2016). Active restoration of nontree (understorey) vegetation would improve ecosystem restoration trajectories and decrease the legacy effect of the species pool in the early stage of understorey vegetation (Garrouj et al 2019).…”

Transfer seeds, hay, or soil blocks? The importance of the completeness of biological inputs to address dispersal and establishment limitations during the restoration of plant assemblages in floodplain grasslands

“…In June 2018, 2019, and 2022, vegetation was monitored within each experimental plot, by the means of a pin‐point method (Stampfli 1991; Garrouj et al 2019). Vegetation records consisted of a 4 m 2 square quadrat located at the center of each experimental plot, 1 m apart from the plot side, to prevent side effects (Fig.…”