在次优降水条件下,预萌发除草剂(Indaziflam)保护核心山艾草-草原生态系统的风险与收益

IF 2.4 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Brynne E. Lazarus, Matthew J. Germino
{"title":"在次优降水条件下,预萌发除草剂(Indaziflam)保护核心山艾草-草原生态系统的风险与收益","authors":"Brynne E. Lazarus,&nbsp;Matthew J. Germino","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2025.06.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Protection of intact habitat from the spread of invasive plants is a global priority, especially where invaders alter wildfire occurrence. Invasion of perennial sagebrush-steppe ecosystems by cheatgrass and other fire-promoting exotic annual grasses (EAGs) is one of the most notorious examples of this problem. Protection and expansion of the remaining intact “core” sagebrush areas are key management goals, and whether this can be accomplished by temporarily inhibiting annual plant populations with pre-emergent herbicides is a key question. We applied indaziflam in fall 2019 to replicate plots within two sagebrush-steppe sites in the Northern Great Basin, USA: 1) a relatively intact, uninvaded, unburned “core” site and 2) a partially invaded site that burned in the 2015 Soda Wildfire. Vegetation cover, density, and growth responses of native perennials were measured annually to 2024. We asked whether our treatments “defended” and “grew” core sagebrush areas. EAG cover remained &lt;15% in indaziflam-treated plots while increasing to &gt;30% in control plots by the fifth year after treatment at the unburned site but did not differ with treatment at the burned site. Native perennial grasses, forbs, and big sagebrush cover and growth did not differ with indaziflam treatment at either site. Moss cover was temporarily lower in indaziflam-treated plots at the unburned site, and cover of a native annual forb was significantly lower in indaziflam-treated plots throughout the study across both sites. Despite posttreatment drought and apparent patchiness in treatment implementation, our treatments “defended the core” by preventing crossing of the 20% EAG invasion threshold in the unburned site but not did not “grow the core.” Our results provide an example of a case in which proactive protection may be easier to accomplish than reactive restoration. Herbicide treatment effects may be sensitive to weather and application details. Implementation monitoring could help explain variability and improve success.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"102 ","pages":"Pages 153-159"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risks and Rewards of Pre-emergent Herbicide (Indaziflam) to Defend Core Sagebrush-Steppe Ecosystems Under Suboptimal Precipitation\",\"authors\":\"Brynne E. Lazarus,&nbsp;Matthew J. Germino\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rama.2025.06.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Protection of intact habitat from the spread of invasive plants is a global priority, especially where invaders alter wildfire occurrence. Invasion of perennial sagebrush-steppe ecosystems by cheatgrass and other fire-promoting exotic annual grasses (EAGs) is one of the most notorious examples of this problem. Protection and expansion of the remaining intact “core” sagebrush areas are key management goals, and whether this can be accomplished by temporarily inhibiting annual plant populations with pre-emergent herbicides is a key question. We applied indaziflam in fall 2019 to replicate plots within two sagebrush-steppe sites in the Northern Great Basin, USA: 1) a relatively intact, uninvaded, unburned “core” site and 2) a partially invaded site that burned in the 2015 Soda Wildfire. Vegetation cover, density, and growth responses of native perennials were measured annually to 2024. We asked whether our treatments “defended” and “grew” core sagebrush areas. EAG cover remained &lt;15% in indaziflam-treated plots while increasing to &gt;30% in control plots by the fifth year after treatment at the unburned site but did not differ with treatment at the burned site. Native perennial grasses, forbs, and big sagebrush cover and growth did not differ with indaziflam treatment at either site. Moss cover was temporarily lower in indaziflam-treated plots at the unburned site, and cover of a native annual forb was significantly lower in indaziflam-treated plots throughout the study across both sites. Despite posttreatment drought and apparent patchiness in treatment implementation, our treatments “defended the core” by preventing crossing of the 20% EAG invasion threshold in the unburned site but not did not “grow the core.” Our results provide an example of a case in which proactive protection may be easier to accomplish than reactive restoration. Herbicide treatment effects may be sensitive to weather and application details. Implementation monitoring could help explain variability and improve success.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49634,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rangeland Ecology & Management\",\"volume\":\"102 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 153-159\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rangeland Ecology & Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1550742425000715\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1550742425000715","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

保护完整的栖息地免受入侵植物的传播是全球的优先事项,特别是在入侵者改变野火发生的地方。欺骗草和其他促火的外来一年生草(EAGs)对多年生山艾灌木-草原生态系统的入侵是这一问题最臭名昭著的例子之一。保护和扩大剩下的完整的“核心”山艾灌木区域是关键的管理目标,这是否可以通过临时抑制年度植物种群来实现,这是一个关键问题。我们于2019年秋季使用indaziflam在美国北部大盆地的两个山艾草草原遗址中复制了地块:1)一个相对完整、未被入侵、未被烧毁的“核心”遗址;2)一个在2015年苏打野火中被部分入侵的遗址。到2024年,每年测量本地多年生植物的植被覆盖度、密度和生长响应。我们询问我们的治疗方法是否“保护”和“生长”了山艾树的核心区域。在茚地夫兰处理地块,eeg覆盖率保持在15%,而在未烧伤地块处理后的第5年,对照地块的eeg覆盖率增加到30%,但与烧伤地块的处理没有差异。原生多年生草本植物、草本植物和大山艾的盖度和生长与茚地夫拉姆处理没有显著差异。在整个研究过程中,在未燃烧的地点,茚地夫兰处理过的地块上,苔藓的盖度暂时较低,在两个地点,茚地夫兰处理过的地块上,本地一年生草本植物的盖度显著较低。尽管处理后的干旱和治疗实施中明显的斑块,我们的处理通过防止在未燃烧部位越过20%的eeg入侵阈值来“保护核心”,但没有“生长核心”。我们的结果提供了一个案例的例子,其中主动保护可能比被动恢复更容易完成。除草剂的处理效果可能对天气和施用细节很敏感。实施监控可以帮助解释可变性并提高成功率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Risks and Rewards of Pre-emergent Herbicide (Indaziflam) to Defend Core Sagebrush-Steppe Ecosystems Under Suboptimal Precipitation
Protection of intact habitat from the spread of invasive plants is a global priority, especially where invaders alter wildfire occurrence. Invasion of perennial sagebrush-steppe ecosystems by cheatgrass and other fire-promoting exotic annual grasses (EAGs) is one of the most notorious examples of this problem. Protection and expansion of the remaining intact “core” sagebrush areas are key management goals, and whether this can be accomplished by temporarily inhibiting annual plant populations with pre-emergent herbicides is a key question. We applied indaziflam in fall 2019 to replicate plots within two sagebrush-steppe sites in the Northern Great Basin, USA: 1) a relatively intact, uninvaded, unburned “core” site and 2) a partially invaded site that burned in the 2015 Soda Wildfire. Vegetation cover, density, and growth responses of native perennials were measured annually to 2024. We asked whether our treatments “defended” and “grew” core sagebrush areas. EAG cover remained <15% in indaziflam-treated plots while increasing to >30% in control plots by the fifth year after treatment at the unburned site but did not differ with treatment at the burned site. Native perennial grasses, forbs, and big sagebrush cover and growth did not differ with indaziflam treatment at either site. Moss cover was temporarily lower in indaziflam-treated plots at the unburned site, and cover of a native annual forb was significantly lower in indaziflam-treated plots throughout the study across both sites. Despite posttreatment drought and apparent patchiness in treatment implementation, our treatments “defended the core” by preventing crossing of the 20% EAG invasion threshold in the unburned site but not did not “grow the core.” Our results provide an example of a case in which proactive protection may be easier to accomplish than reactive restoration. Herbicide treatment effects may be sensitive to weather and application details. Implementation monitoring could help explain variability and improve success.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Rangeland Ecology & Management
Rangeland Ecology & Management 农林科学-环境科学
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
13.00%
发文量
87
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: Rangeland Ecology & Management publishes all topics-including ecology, management, socioeconomic and policy-pertaining to global rangelands. The journal''s mission is to inform academics, ecosystem managers and policy makers of science-based information to promote sound rangeland stewardship. Author submissions are published in five manuscript categories: original research papers, high-profile forum topics, concept syntheses, as well as research and technical notes. Rangelands represent approximately 50% of the Earth''s land area and provision multiple ecosystem services for large human populations. This expansive and diverse land area functions as coupled human-ecological systems. Knowledge of both social and biophysical system components and their interactions represent the foundation for informed rangeland stewardship. Rangeland Ecology & Management uniquely integrates information from multiple system components to address current and pending challenges confronting global rangelands.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信