Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T13:37:43.742Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variable Impacts of Imazapic Rate on Downy Brome (Bromus tectorum) and Seeded Species in Two Rangeland Communities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Christo Morris ,
Thomas A. Monaco  and
Craig W. Rigby
Christo Morris
Affiliation:
Department of Wildland Resources, Utah State University, Logan UT, 84322
Thomas A. Monaco*
Affiliation:
USDA–ARS Forage and Range Research Laboratory, Logan UT, 84322
Craig W. Rigby
Affiliation:
USDA–ARS Forage and Range Research Laboratory, Logan UT, 84322
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The herbicide imazapic is registered for use on rangelands and provides effective short-term control of certain invasive annual grasses. However, details about optimal application rates for downy brome and susceptibility of simultaneously seeded species are lacking. Thus, we investigated downy brome and seeded species responses to variable rates of imazapic (0, 35, 70, 105, and 140 g ai/ha) in two plant communities (salt desert shrub and Wyoming big sagebrush). In autumn 2003, plots were treated with imazapic and seeded with one of five perennial plant materials (Siberian wheatgrass [‘Vavilov’ and the experimental source Kazak]; prostrate kochia [‘Immigrant’ and the experimental source 6X], and Russian wildrye [‘Bozoisky II’]). Downy brome cover and seeded species establishment were evaluated in spring 2004 and 2006. Downy brome cover in 2004 decreased with increasing imazapic rate at both sites, although more so at the Wyoming big sagebrush site. In 2006, no difference in downy brome cover existed among herbicide rates at the Wyoming big sagebrush site. At the salt desert shrub site, the high rate of imazapic reduced downy brome cover by about 25% compared to untreated plots. ‘Vavilov’ Siberian wheatgrass was the only seeded species with lower downy brome cover in 2006 than 2004. Seeded species establishment increased with imazapic rate in the salt desert shrub community, but in the Wyoming big sagebrush community it peaked at intermediate rates and declined at higher rates. Variation in downy brome control and seeded species establishment might have been associated with differences in precipitation, soil organic matter, and disturbance history between sites. Overall, imazapic was useful for helping establish desirable perennial species, but unless downy brome is reduced below a critical threshold, favorable precipitation can return sites to pretreatment levels within two years.

Keywords

Imazapicdowny brome, Bromus tectorum L. BROTESiberian wheatgrass, Agropyron fragile (Roth) P. CandargyRussian wildrye, Psathyrostachys juncea (Fisch.) Nevskiprostrate kochia, Bassia prostrata (L.) A. J. ScottWyoming big sagebrush, Artemisia tridentata Nutt. var. wyomingensis (Beetle & Young) S. L. Welsh. Nomenclature of all plants follow the USDA–NRCS PLANTS database (http://plants.usda.gov/ ).Assisted successionintegrated weed managementrangeland seedingseedling establishment
Type
Research
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , April 2009 , pp. 110 - 119
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

Arriaga, L., Castellanos, A. E., Moreno, E., and Alarcon, J. 2004. Potential ecological distribution of alien invasive species and risk assessment: a case study of buffel grass in arid regions of Mexico. Conserv. Biol 18:1504–1514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asay, K. H., Chatterton, N. J., Jensen, K. B., Jones, T. A., Waldron, B. L., and Horton, W. H. 2003. Breeding improved grasses for semiarid rangelands. Arid Land Res. Manag 17:469–478.Google Scholar
Benz, L. J., Beck, K. G., Whitson, T. D., and Koch, D. W. 1999. Reclaiming Russian knapweed infested rangeland. J. Range Manag 52:351–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, J. C., Roundy, B. A., Blank, R. R., Meyer, S. A., and Whitaker, A. 2007. What makes Great Basin sagebrush ecosystems invasible by Bromus tectorum? Ecol. Monogr 77:117–145.Google Scholar
Crawford, J. A., Olson, R. A., West, N. E., Mosley, J. C., Schroeder, M. A., Whitson, T. D., Miller, R. F., Gregg, M. A., and Boyd, C. S. 2004. Synthesis Paper—Ecology and management of sage-grouse and sage-grouse habitat. J. Range Manag 57:2–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Currie, P. O., Volesky, J. D., Hilken, T. O., and White, R. S. 1987. Selective control of annual bromes in perennial grass stands. J. Range Manag 40:547–550.Google Scholar
Daehler, C. 1998. The taxonomic distribution of invasive angiosperm plants: ecological insights and comparison to agricultural weeds. Biol. Conserv 84:167–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davison, J. C. and Smith, E. G. 2007. Imazapic provides 2-year control of weedy annuals in a seeded Great Basin fuelbreak. Native Plants J 8:91–95.Google Scholar
Deil, U., Alvarez, M., and Paulini, I. 2007. Native and non-native species in annual grassland vegetation in Mediterranean Chile. Phytocoenologia 37:769–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewey, S. A., Jenkins, M. J., and Tonioli, R. C. 1995. Wildfire suppression: a paradigm for noxious weed management. Weed Technol 9:621–627.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M. 2000. Invasive weeds in rangelands: species, impacts, and management. Weed Sci 48:255–265.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M., Brooks, M. L., Allen, E. B., Minnich, R., Rice, P. M., and Kyser, G. B. 2006. Control of invasive weeds with prescribed burning. Weed Technol 20:535–548.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
Evans, R. A. 1961. Effects of different densities of downy brome (Bromus tectorum) on growth and survival of crested wheatgrass (Agropyron desertorum). Weeds 9:216–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabbard, B. L. and Fowler, N. L. 2007. Wide ecological amplitude of a diversity-reducing invasive grass. Biol. Invasions 9:149–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, D. and Novoplansky, A. 1997. On the relative importance of competition in unproductive environments. J. Ecol 85:409–418.Google Scholar
Gremmen, N. J. M., Chown, S. L., and Marshall, D. J. 1998. Impact of the introduced grass Agrostis stolonifera on vegetation and soil fauna communities at Marion Island, sub-Antarctic. Biol. Conserv 85:223–231.Google Scholar
Grime, J. P. 1977. Evidence for the existence of three primary strategies in plants and its relevance to ecological and evolutionary theory. Am. Nat 111:1169–1194.Google Scholar
Harmoney, K. R. 2007. Grazing and burning Japanese brome (Bromus japonicus) on mixed grass rangelands. Rangeland Ecol. Manag 60:479–486.Google Scholar
Hempy-Mayer, K. and Pyke, D. A. 2008. Defoliation effects on Bromus tectorum seed production: implications for grazing. Rangeland Ecol. Manag 61:116–123.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, W. A., Lucatelli, V., Silva, F. J., Azeuedo, I. N. C., Marinho, M. D., Albuquerque, A. M. S., Lopes, A. D., and Moreira, S. P. 2004. Impact of the invasive alien grass Melinis minutiflora at the savanna–forest ecotone in the Brazilian Cerrado. Divers. Distrib 10:99–103.Google Scholar
Humphrey, L. D. 2001. Seed banks of Bromus tectorum-dominated communities in the Great Basin. West. N. Am. Nat 61:85–92.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
Khuroo, A. A., Rashid, I., Reshi, Z., Dar, G. H., and Wafai, B. A. 2007. The alien flora of Kashmir Himalaya. Biol. Invasions 9:269–292.Google Scholar
Kitchen, S. G. and Monsen, S. B. 2001. Forage kochia seed germination response to storage time and temperature. J. Range Manag 54:299–306.Google Scholar
Knapp, P. A. 1996. Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L.) dominance in the Great Basin Desert. Global Environ. Change 6:37–57.Google Scholar
Knick, S. T. and Rotenberry, J. T. 1997. Landscape characteristics of disturbed shrubsteppe habitats in southwestern Idaho. Ecology 12:287–297.Google Scholar
Kyser, G. B., DiTomaso, J. M., Doran, M. P., Orloff, S. B., Wilson, R. G., Lancaster, D. L., Lile, D. F., and Porath, M. L. 2007. Control of medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) and other annual grasses with imazapic. Weed Technol 21:66–75.Google Scholar
Lentner, M. and Bishop, T. 1993. Experimental Design and Analysis. Blacksburg, VA Valley Book Co. 585.Google Scholar
Mack, M. C. and D'Antonio, C. M. 1998. Impacts of biological invasions on disturbance regimes. Trends Ecol. Evol 13:195–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mack, M. C., D'Antonio, C. M., and Ley, R. E. 2001. Alteration of ecosystem nitrogen dynamics by exotic plants: a case study of C-4 grasses in Hawaii. Ecol. Appl 11:1323–1335.Google Scholar
Mack, R. N. 1981. Invasion of Bromus tectorum L. into westen North America: an ecological chronicle. Agro-Ecosystems 7:145–165.Google Scholar
Mack, R. N. and Pyke, D. A. 1983. The demography of Bromus tectorum: variation in time and space. J. Ecol 71:69–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milton, S. J. 2004. Grasses as invasive alien plants in South Africa. S. Afr. J. Sci 100:69–75.Google Scholar
Monaco, T. A. and Creech, J. E. 2004. Sulfosulfuron effects on growth and photosynthesis of 15 range grasses. J. Range Manag 57:490–496.Google Scholar
Monaco, T. A., Osmond, T. M., and Dewey, S. A. 2005. Medusahead control with fall- and spring-applied herbicides on northern Utah foothills. Weed Technol 19:653–658.Google Scholar
Monaco, T. A., Waldron, B. L., Newhall, R. L., and Horton, W. H. 2003. Re-establishing perennial vegetation in cheatgrass monocultures. Rangelands 25:26–29.Google Scholar
Mosley, J. C. 1996. Prescribed sheep grazing to suppress cheatgrass: a review. Sheep Res. J 12:74–81.Google Scholar
Newhall, R. L., Monaco, T. A., Horton, W. H., Harrison, R. D., and Page, R. J. 2004. Rehabilitating salt-desert ecosystems following wildfire and wind erosion. Rangelands 26:3–7.Google Scholar
Norton, J. B., Monaco, T. A., and Norton, U. 2007. Mediterranean annual grasses in western North America: kids in a candy store. Plant Soil 298:1–5.Google Scholar
NRCS 2008. USDA–Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil Survey. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed: November 26, 2008.Google Scholar
Page, R. J., Rasmussen, V. P., Horton, H. H., Newhall, R. L., Wilson, D. E., Kidd, G. W., and Roberts, T. C. 1994. White Rocks Road immigrant forage kochia trial seedings. Rangelands 16:167–168.Google Scholar
Palazzo, A. J., Jensen, K. B., Waldron, B. L., and Cary, T. J. 2005. Effects of tank tracking on range grasses. J. Terramech 42:177–191.Google Scholar
Park, K. W. and Mallory-Smith, C. A. 2005. Multiple herbicide resistance in downy brome (Bromus tectorum) and its impact on fitness. Weed Sci 53:780–786.Google Scholar
Pokorny, M. L., Sheley, R. L., Zabinski, C. A., Engel, R. E., Svejcar, T. J., and Borkowski, J. J. 2005. Plant functional group diversity as a mechanism for invasion resistance. Restor. Ecol 13:448–459.Google Scholar
Pysek, P. 1998. Is there a taxonomic pattern to plant invasions? Oikos 82:282–294.Google Scholar
Radosevich, S. R., Holt, J. S., and Ghersa, C. M. 2007. Ecology of Weeds and Invasive Plants. Hoboken, NJ John Wiley & Sons. 472.Google Scholar
Rossiter, N. A., Setterfield, S. A., Douglas, M. M., and Hutley, L. B. 2003. Testing the grass–fire cycle: alien grass invasion in the tropical savannas of northern Australia. Divers. Distrib 9:169–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sall, J. C., Creighton, L., and Lehman, A. 2005. JMP Start Statistics, 3rd ed. Cary, NC SAS Institute. 560.Google Scholar
Seabloom, E. W., Williams, J. W., Slayback, D., Stoms, D. M., Viers, J. H., and Dobson, A. P. 2006. Human impacts, plant invasion, and imperiled plant species in California. Ecol. Appl 16:1338–1350.Google Scholar
Sheley, R. L. 2007. Revegetating Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens) and green rabbitbrush (Ericameria teretifolia) infested rangeland in a single entry. Weed Sci 55:365–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheley, R. L., Carpinelli, M. F., and Morghan, K. J. R. 2007. Effects of imazapic on target and nontarget vegetation during revegetation. Weed Technol 21:1071–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheley, R. L. and Jacobs, J. S. 1997. “Acceptable” levels of spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa) control. Weed Technol 11:363–368.Google Scholar
Sheley, R. L., Jacobs, J. S., and Lucas, D. E. 2001. Revegetating spotted knapweed infested rangelands in a single entry. J. Range Manag 54:144–151.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., Jacobs, J. S., and Svejcar, T. J. 2005. Integrating disturbance and colonization during rehabilitation of invasive weed-dominated grasslands. Weed Sci 53:307–314.Google Scholar
Shinn, S. L. and Thill, D. C. 2002. The response of yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis), annual grasses, and smooth brome (Bromus inermis) to imazapic and picloram. Weed Technol 16:366–370.Google Scholar
Shinn, S. L. and Thill, D. C. 2003. The response of yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis), spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa), and meadow hawkweed (Hieracium caespitosum) to imazapic. Weed Technol 17:94–101.Google Scholar
Shinn, S. L. and Thill, D. C. 2004. Tolerance of several perennial grasses to imazapic. Weed Technol 18:60–65.Google Scholar
Thompson, T. W., Roundy, B. A., McArthur, E. D., Jessop, B. D., Waldron, B., and Davis, J. N. 2006. Fire rehabilitation using native and introduced species: a landscape trial. Rangeland Ecol. Manag 59:237–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, D. 2005. Measuring the effects of invasive species on the demography of a rare endemic plant. Biol. Invasions 7:615–624.Google Scholar
van der Putten, W. H., Kowalchuk, G. A., Brinkman, E. P., Doodeman, G. T. A., van der Kaaij, R. M., Kamp, A. F. D., Menting, F. B. J., and Veenendaal, E. M. 2007. Soil feedback of exotic savanna grass relates to pathogen absence and mycorrhizal selectivity. Ecology 88:978–988.Google Scholar
Vogel, K. P. and Masters, R. A. 2001. Frequency grid—a simple tool for measuring grassland establishment. J. Range Manag 54:653–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldron, B. L., Monaco, T. A., Jensen, K. B., Harrison, R. D., Palazzo, A. J., and Kulbeth, J. D. 2005. Coexistence of native and introduced perennial grasses following simultaneous seeding. Agron. J 97:990–996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitson, T. D. and Koch, D. W. 1998. Control of downy brome (Bromus tectorum) with herbicides and perennial grass competition. Weed Technol 12:391–396.Google Scholar
WRCC 2008. Western Regional Climate Center. Historical Climate Information. www.wrcc.dri.edu. Accessed: November 26, 2008.Google Scholar
Xu, H. G., Ding, H., Li, M. Y., Qiang, S., Guo, J. Y., Han, Z. M., Huang, Z. G., Sun, H. Y., He, S. P., Wu, H. R., and Wan, F. H. 2006. The distribution and economic losses of alien species invasion to China. Biol. Invasions 8:1495–1500.Google Scholar
Young, J. A. and Evans, R. A. 1978. Population dynamics after wildfires in sagebrush grasslands. J. Range Manag 31:283–289.Google Scholar