Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Invasive Plant Scien...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Invasive Plant Science and Management
Article . 2017 . Peer-reviewed
License: Cambridge Core User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 1 versions
addClaim

Secondary Invasion and Reinvasion after Russian-Olive Removal and Revegetation

Authors: Erin K. Espeland; Jennifer M. Muscha; Joseph Scianna; Robert Kilian; Natalie M. West; Mark K. Petersen;

Secondary Invasion and Reinvasion after Russian-Olive Removal and Revegetation

Abstract

Russian-olive is a nitrogen-fixing tree invading riparian corridors in western North America. The premise of revegetation after weed removal is that revegetation is required to return native species to a removal site and that revegetation improves site resistance to invasion or reinvasion via competitive exclusion. Therefore, we expected that revegetation would reduce invasive species cover and increase native species cover compared with non-revegetated controls. Native understory species diversity increased with time since removal. We recorded 18.2 native species in 2012, and 28.2 native species in 2016. Out of 22 planted species, 2 did not establish. Diversity in revegetated plots did not differ from unplanted controls, likely because species spread quickly across plot boundaries. Native perennial grass, seeded species, and annual bromes increased over time, while nonnative forbs and native forbs decreased over time. Only invasive perennial grass cover responded to the revegetation treatment with cover much higher in controls compared with revegetated plots (25.7% vs. 7.7%); this was likely a response to a preplanting herbicide treatment. All categories of species diversity except invasive species diversity increased over time. Only 4% of Russian-olive stumps resprouted in the first year of removal, less than 1% resprouted 2 yr after removal. There was no Russian-olive emergence from seed in the removal year, and seed emergence varied exponentially among following years. Seeded native species did not have trouble establishing once adequate spring moisture occurred in the second growing season after Russian-olive removal, indicating that removal did not present substantial obstacles to successful revegetation. Follow-up control of Russian-olive is critical after initial treatment.

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    14
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
14
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!