4.5 Article

Stability of C3 and C4 Grass Patches in Woody Encroached Rangeland after Fire and Simulated Grazing

期刊

DIVERSITY-BASEL
卷 15, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/d15101069

关键词

brush management; Buchloe dactyloides; Nassella leucotricha; Prosopis glandulosa; woody plant encroachment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that fire treatments on Prosopis glandulosa trees led to a decrease in Buchloe dactyloides cover, while frequent clipping reduced the coverage of Nassella leucotricha. In several fire treatments or clipping + fire treatments, the cover of C-4 mid-grass increased significantly, especially with summer fire treatments.
As the woody legume, Prosopis glandulosa (honey mesquite) has encroached into grasslands and rangelands in the southern Great Plains, USA, two grass species, C-4 shortgrass, Buchloe dactyloides (buffalograss), and C-3 mid-grass, Nassella leucotricha (Texas wintergrass), have increased in dominance. Occurrence of more productive C-4 mid-grasses and herbaceous diversity have declined. We measured effects of various combinations of spring clipping (to simulate cattle grazing) and summer and/or winter fire treatments on the stability of monoculture patches of these two grass species over an eight-year period, with the goal of reducing Nassella and increasing C-4 mid-grass cover. All fire treatments top-killed most Prosopis trees that subsequently resprouted. Buchloe cover declined in the No Clip + No Fire treatment but remained intact with clipping and/or fire. Frequent clipping reduced Nassella cover across all fire treatments. Buchloe encroachment into Nassella patches was greatest in the Clip + Alternate Season fire treatment. C-4 mid-grass cover increased to 15-25% in Nassella patches in several fire-only or Clip + Fire treatments; greatest gains were observed in treatments that included summer fire. In contrast, C-4 mid-grass gains were lower in Buchloe patches. These results suggest that C-4 mid-grass restoration was linked with treatments that reduced Nassella cover.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据