U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory: Mandan, ND
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Employment
                        Work With Us
                                    ARS Vacancies at USDAJOBS
                    Local News
                        INTEGRATOR
                                    Bottom Line Ag SummitSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Mandan, North Dakota Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory Research Publications at this Location





- ARS National Programs
- Search for a scientific manuscript
- Search for a research project
- ARS Software
- Programs and Projects
- Collaborations
- Subjects of Investigation
- Publications
- IACUC Executive Minutes

Title:   Author  item
                                            Hendrickson, Johnitem
                                            LUND, CORIE - USDA-NRCS
  Submitted to: Rangeland Ecology and Management
                                    Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
                                    Publication Acceptance Date: 3/27/2010
                                    Publication  Date: 7/1/2010
                                    Citation: Hendrickson, J.R., Lund, C.B. 2010. Plant community and target species affect responses to restoration strategies. Rangeland Ecology and Management.Interpretive Summary: Increases in Kentucky bluegrass and smooth brome on northern Great Plains rangelands have impacted seasonal forage distribution, lowered plant diversity and increased carbon and nitrogen losses from the ecosystem.  We evaluated five different restoration strategies for reducing the amounts of these invasive perennial grasses in rangelands.  We found that fire and herbicide caused the greatest reduction in Kentucky bluegrass but mowing and raking reduced smooth brome the most.  Community composition and time following treatment application impacted the results. Our results suggest that a single restoration strategy is not applicable for both these invasive species and successful strategies will need to incorporate both the invasive species and the community in their planning.
                                Technical Abstract: Increases in Kentucky bluegrass and smooth brome on northern Great Plains rangelands have the potential to negatively impact ecosystem function, lower plant diversity and alter seasonal forage distribution, but control strategies are lacking in the region.  A project was initiated on a heavily invaded 16 ha grassland that had not been grazed or hayed for at least 20 years.  Five restoration treatments and a control were initiated in 2003 on communities dominated by 1) smooth brome (Bromus inermis Leyss.), 2) Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.), 3) native grasses, 4) a mix of introduced species and 5) smooth brome and Kentucky bluegrass.  Restoration treatments were 1) late-April burn, 2) late-April burn followed by imazapic  at 17.3 oz. ai ha-1, 3) imazapic only at the same rate, 4) mowing, 5) mowing followed by litter removal and 6) control.   We found that treatment responses were affected by target species and community.  Generally, burning followed by imazapic reduced Kentucky bluegrass in the species composition but smooth brome was reduced by mowing followed by raking.  In both instances, the treatment that reduced the amount of one invasive species in the species composition tended to result in the other increasing.  In 2005, responses of Kentucky bluegrass, other invasive species and native grasses to restoration treatment differed depending on community.  Burning followed by imazapic reduced live grass biomass in all communities except the native in the year following treatment.  This response disappeared by the third year of the study.  The reduction in live grass biomass may limit the use of burning followed by imazapic for producers. Our data emphasized that effective control of perennial invasive grasses will incorporate community and species responses.


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov