Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T07:40:42.120Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessing Invasiveness of Exotic Weeds outside their Current Invasive Range

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Matthew J. Rinella
Matthew J. Rinella*
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Livestock and Range Research Laboratory, 243 Fort Keogh Road, Miles City, Montana 59301
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

When exotic species invade a region, it becomes important to assess their invasiveness in adjacent uninvaded regions to determine if weed prevention measures are needed. Leafy spurge and knapweed species are absent from the vast majority of eastern Montana, but the region is surrounded by regions heavily invaded by these species. To assess invasiveness of leafy spurge and Russian and spotted knapweed in common eastern Montana grassland sites, I introduced these species to three sites as seeds (120 live seeds plot−1) and seedlings (6 plot−1). I assessed how common grazing regimes influenced invasiveness by imposing cattle, sheep, mixed grazing (i.e., cattle plus sheep), and grazing exclusion treatments for 7 yr. Invader survival did not appear to differ greatly among sheep, cattle, and mixed grazing treatments, but excluding grazing lowered probabilities that plots maintained invaders for the entire study period at two of three sites. At these same sites, grazing exclusion increased growth rates of those invaders that did survive, at least in the case of leafy spurge. Regardless of grazing treatment or site, however, large proportions of plots did not maintain invaders through the end of the study period. At one heavy clay site, only one small leafy spurge plant persisted through the end of the study. In the seventh study year, the plots with the most leafy spurge and Russian knapweed produced 222 and 112 stems, respectively, and the stems remained mostly confined to the 2- by 2-m plots. These findings suggest that, barring intense disturbance, leafy spurge and spotted and Russian knapweed might be incapable of invading some grasslands of eastern Montana, particularly upland sites with high clay content. Any upland sites in the region these species are capable of invading will likely be invaded only very slowly.

Keywords

Leafy spurge, Euphorbia esula L.Russian knapweed, Acroptilon repens (L.) DC.Spotted knapweed, Centaurea stoebe L.Cattlegrazinginvaderinvasioninvasivepopulation dynamicssheep
Type
Research
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , December 2013 , pp. 545 - 553
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Albert, J. H. and Chib, S. 1993. Bayesian analysis of binary and polychotomous response data. J. Am. Statistical Assoc. 88:669–679.Google Scholar
Bates, J. D. 2005. Herbaceous response to cattle grazing following juniper cutting in Oregon. Rangeland Ecol. Manag. 58:225–233.Google Scholar
Clark, C. J. 2007. Are plant populations seed limited? A critique and meta-analysis of seed addition experiments. Am. Nat. 170:128–142.Google Scholar
Cousens, R. and Mortimer, A. M. 1995. Dynamics Of Weed Populations. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press. 332 p.Google Scholar
Crawford, K. M. and Whitney, K. D. 2010. Population genetic diversity influences colonization success. Mol. Ecol. 19:1253–1263.Google Scholar
D'Antonio, C. M. 1993. Mechanisms controlling invasion of coastal plant communities by the alien succulent Carpobrotus edulis . Ecology 74:83–95.Google Scholar
Davies, K. W. and Johnson, D. D. 2011. Are we “missing the boat” on preventing the spread of invasive plants in rangelands? Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 4:166–172.Google Scholar
Davis, M. A., Grime, J. P., and Thompson, K. 2000. Fluctuating resources in plant communities: a general theory of invasibility. J. Ecol. 88:528–534.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M. 2000. Invasive weeds in rangelands: species, impacts, and management. Weed Sci. 48:255–265.Google Scholar
Duncan, C. A., Jachetta, J. J., Brown, M. L., Carrithers, V. F., Clark, J. K., DiTomaso, J. M., Lym, R. G., McDaniel, K. C., Renz, M. J., and Rice, P. M. 2004. Assessing the economic, environmental, and societal losses from invasive plants on rangeland and wildlands. Weed Technol. 18:1411–1416.Google Scholar
Eriksson, O. and Ehrlen, J. 1992. Seed and microsite limitation of recruitment in plant populations. Oecologia 91:360–364.Google Scholar
Eriksson, O., Wikstrom, S., Eriksson, A., and Lindborg, R. 2006. Species-rich Scandinavian grasslands are inherently open to invasion Biol. Invasions 8:355–363.Google Scholar
Eschtruth, A. K. and Battles, J. J. 2009. Assessing the relative importance of disturbance, herbivory, diversity and propagule pressure in exotic plant invasion Ecol. Monogr. 79:265–280.Google Scholar
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., and Rubin, D. B. 2004. Bayesian Data Analysis. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL. Chapman & Hall/CRC. 668 p.Google Scholar
Gelman, A. and Hill, J. 2007. Data Analysis using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models. New York Cambridge University Press. 625 p.Google Scholar
Goodwin, K., Sheley, R., Jacobs, J., Wood, S., Manoukian, M., Schuldt, M., Miller, E., and Sackman, S. 2012. Cooperative prevention systems to protect rangelands from the spread of invasive plants. Rangelands 34:26–31.Google Scholar
Haan, N. L., Hunter, M. R., and Hunter, M. D. 2012. Investigating predictors of plant establishment during roadside restoration. Restor. Ecol. 20:315–321.Google Scholar
Heitschmidt, R. K., Klement, K. D., and Haferkamp, M. R. 2005. Interactive effects of drought and grazing on northern Great Plains rangelands. Rangeland Ecol. Manag. 58:11–19.Google Scholar
Hogan, J. P. and Phillips, C. J. C. 2011. Transmission of weed seed by livestock: a review. Anim. Prod. Sci. 51:391–398.Google Scholar
Intel Corporation, . 2010. Intel Visual Fortran Compiler Professional Edition 11.1. Santa Clara, CA.Google Scholar
Jacobs, J. S., Sheley, R. L., and Borkowski, J. J. 2006. Integrated management of leafy spurge-infested rangeland. Rangeland Ecol. Manag. 59:475–482.Google Scholar
James, J. J., Svejcar, T. J., and Rinella, M. J. 2011. Demographic processes limiting seedling recruitment in aridland restoration. J. Appl. Ecol. 48:961–969.Google Scholar
Kronberg, S. L., Muntifering, R. B., Ayers, E. L., and Marlow, C. B. 1993. Cattle avoidance of leafy spurge: a case of conditioned aversion. J. Range Manag. 46:364–366.Google Scholar
Kronberg, S. L. and Walker, J. W. 1999. Sheep preference for leafy spurge from Idaho and North Dakota. J. Range Manag. 52:39–44.Google Scholar
Lachmuth, S., Durka, W., and Schurr, F. M. 2010. The making of a rapid plant invader: genetic diversity and differentiation in the native and invaded range of Senecio inaequidens . Mol. Ecol. 19:3952–3967.Google Scholar
Lambrinos, J. G. 2002. The variable invasive success of Cortaderia species in a complex landscape. Ecology 83:518–529.Google Scholar
Landgraf, B. K., Fay, P. K., and Havstad, K. M. 1984. Utilization of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) by sheep. Weed Sci. 32:348–352.Google Scholar
Levine, J. M., Adler, P. B., and Yelenik, S. G. 2004. A meta-analysis of biotic resistance to exotic plant invasions. Ecol. Lett. 7:975–989.Google Scholar
Lodge, D. M. 1993. Biological invasions: lessons from ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 8:133–136.Google Scholar
Lonsdale, W. M. and Lane, A. M. 1994. Tourist vehicles as vectors of weed seeds in Kakadu National Park, Northern Australia. Biol. Conserv. 69:277–283.Google Scholar
Lym, R. G. and Kirby, D. R. 1987. Cattle foraging behavior in leafy spurge-infested rangeland. Weed Technol. 1:314–318.Google Scholar
Mason, R. A. B., Cooke, J., Moles, A. T., and Leishman, M. R. 2008. Reproductive output of invasive versus native plants. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 17:633–640.Google Scholar
Meyer, A. H. and Schmid, B. 1999. Seed dynamics and seedling establishment in the invading perennial Solidago altissima under different experimental treatments. J. Ecol. 87:28–41.Google Scholar
[NOAA] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2012. NOAA National Climatic Data Center. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/climatedata.html. Accessed 1/8/2012Google Scholar
Oesterheld, M. and Sala, O. E. 1990. Effects of grazing on seedling establishment: the role of seed and safe-site availability. J. Veg. Sci. 1:353–358.Google Scholar
Olson, B. E. and Wallander, R. T. 2001. Sheep grazing spotted knapweed and Idaho fescue. J. Range Manag. 54:25–30.Google Scholar
Ortega, Y. K. and Pearson, D. E. 2011. Long-term effects of weed control with picloram along a gradient of spotted knapweed invasion. Rangeland Ecol. Manag. 64:67–77.Google Scholar
Perez-Camacho, L. and Rebollo, S. 2009. Are irrigation and grazing effects transfered, accumulated, or counteracted during plant recruitment? Plant Ecol. 201:501–515.Google Scholar
Rice, P. M., Toney, C. J., Bedunah, D. J., and Carlson, C. E. 1997. Plant community diversity and growth form responses to herbicide applications for control of Centaurea maculosa . J. Appl. Ecol. 34:1397–1412.Google Scholar
Rinella, M. J. and Hileman, B. J. 2009. Efficacy of prescribed grazing depends on timing, intensity and frequency. J. Appl. Ecol. 46:796–803.Google Scholar
Rinella, M. J. and James, J. J. 2010. Invasive plant researchers should calculate effect sizes, not P-values. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 3:106–112.Google Scholar
Rinella, M. J. and Luschei, E. C. 2007. Hierarchical Bayesian methods estimate invasive weed impacts at pertinent spatial scales. Biol. Invasions 9:545–558.Google Scholar
Rinella, M. J., Maxwell, B. D., Fay, P. K., Weaver, T., and Sheley, R. L. 2009. Control effort exacerbates invasive species problem. Ecol. Appl. 19:155–162.Google Scholar
Schmidt, A. C., Fraser, L. H., Carlyle, C. N., and Bassett, E. R. L. 2012. Does cattle grazing affect ant abundance and diversity in temperate grasslands? Rangeland Ecol. Manag. 65:292–298.Google Scholar
Seefeldt, S. S., Taylor, J. B., and Van Vleet, S. 2007. Reducing Euphorbia esula with a combination of sheep grazing and imazapic. J. Arid Environ. 69:432–440.Google Scholar
Sheley, R. L., Jacobs, J. S., and Martin, J. M. 2004. Integrating 2,4-D and sheep grazing to rehabilitate spotted knapweed infestations. J. Range Manag. 57:371–375.Google Scholar
Sheley, R. L. and Petroff, J. K. 1999. Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Corvallis, OR Oregon State University Press. 438 p.Google Scholar
Simberloff, D. 2009. The role of propagule pressure in biological invasions. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 40:81–102.Google Scholar
Snyder, R. E. 2003. How demographic stochasticity can slow biological invasions. Ecology 84:1333–1339.Google Scholar
Stohlgren, T. J., Schell, L. D., and Vanden Heuvel, B. 1999. How grazing and soil quality affect native and exotic plant diversity in Rocky Mountain grasslands. Ecol. Appl. 9:45–64.Google Scholar
Vilà, M., Siamantziouras, A. D., Brundu, G., Camarda, I., Lambdon, P., Medail, F., Moragues, E., Suehs, C. M., Traveset, A., Troumbis, A. Y., and Hulme, P. E. 2008. Widespread resistance of Mediterranean island ecosystems to the establishment of three alien species. Divers. Distrib. 14:839–851.Google Scholar
Von der Lippe, M. and Kowarik, I. 2007. Long-distance dispersal of plants by vehicles as a driver of plant invasions. Conserv. Biol. 21:986–996.Google Scholar
Wace, N. 1977. Assessment of dispersal of plant species-The car-borne flora in Canberra. Proc. Ecol. Soc. Aust. 10:167–186.Google Scholar
Walker, J. W., Kronberg, S. L., Al-Rowaily, S. L., and West, N. E. 1994. Comparison of sheep and goat preferences for leafy spurge. J. Range Manag. 47:429–434.Google Scholar