Effectiveness of management techniques for Microstegium vimineum

Transcription

1 Effectiveness of management techniques for Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass) invasions and their impacts on native species diversity and abundance Luke Flory Indiana University

2 Goals of invasive plant management

3 Goals of invasive plant management 1. Effectively remove invasive plant

4 Goals of invasive plant management 1. Effectively remove invasive plant 2. Minimize impacts on native plant community

5 Goals of invasive plant management 1. Effectively remove invasive plant 2. Minimize impacts on native plant community 3. Restore native plant community to prevent future invasions

6 Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass) C4 shade tolerant annual grass produces > 1000 seeds/plant native to southeast Asia (Fairbrothers and Gray 1972) persistent 3+ year seed bank (Barden 1987) not eaten by mammals or insects, not attacked by pathogens

7 Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass) USDA, NRCS The PLANTS Database ( Introduced in early 1900s, now spreading very rapidly (Fairbrothers and Gray 1972) currently invasive in > 20 states considered the most problematic invasive species in many eastern states

8 Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass) most commonly found in disturbed riparian areas (Redman 1995) invades sites full sun to <5% ambient light (Winter et al. 1982) can tolerate a wide range of soil moisture conditions Wildlife opening Forest understory

9 Microstegium vimineum (Japanese stiltgrass) Reduces the productivity and richness of native herbaceous species and may reduce native tree seedling emergence (see poster #16) Native species biomass (g) 35 NATIVE PRODUCTIVITY P < Uninvaded Invaded

10 Research Questions 1. What is the optimum management technique for eradicating Microstegium invasions?

11 Research Questions 1. What is the optimum management technique for eradicating Microstegium invasions? 2. How do different management techniques impact native plant productivity and diversity?

12 Research Questions 1. What is the optimum management technique for eradicating Microstegium invasions? 2. How do different management techniques impact native plant productivity and diversity? 3. Do additions of native seeds inhibit future Microstegium invasions or increase native plant diversity and productivity?

13 No restoration Control Handweeding POST herbicide 2m POST + PRE herbicide 2m Experimental Design

14 No restoration Control Handweeding POST herbicide 2m POST + PRE herbicide 2m

15 No restoration Control Handweeding POST herbicide 2m POST + PRE herbicide 2m

16 No restoration Control Handweeding POST herbicide Grass specific Post-emergent herbicide Fusilade DX 0.75 oz./gal (Fluazifop-P-butyl) 2m POST + PRE herbicide 2m

17 No restoration Control Handweeding POST herbicide 2m POST + PRE herbicide 2m Grass specific Post-emergent herbicide plus Pre-emergent herbicide Pendulum AquaCap 3.2 oz./1,000 sq ft (pendimethalin)

18 No restoration 2m Restoration: 10 native forb species added Control Control Handweeding Handweeding POST herbicide POST herbicide POST + PRE herbicide POST + PRE herbicide 2m

19 No restoration Restoration: 10 native forb species added Control Control Handweeding Handweeding X 5 reps X 8 sites 2m POST herbicide POST herbicide POST + PRE herbicide POST + PRE herbicide 2m = 320 plots

20 Research Sites Light availability PAR JW SF W O R BO W N R BS BO W N R O H M SF M R O F N H IL BO W N R W G F N H SL Soil moisture 0.25 Gravimetric soil moisture O tr ut rc d. W O R N BO W R H O te si N BO W R W G ck Ja n so W h as NW BO R rn Bu te si le dd Sa ke La an di In ke La

21 = treatments applied = data collected = seed added Apply POST and HW Add seed to restoration plots Summer 2005 Winter 2006 Fall 2005 Destructive harvest Apply PRE Spring 2006 Apply POST and HW Apply PRE Spring 2007 Late spring 2006 Late spring 2006 Collect cover data Fall 2006 Destructive harvest Late spring 2007 Collect cover data

22 Fall 2005 Harvest Microstegium biomass (g) Microstegium biomass 40 a Treatment: P < Control 98% reduction b 99% reduction b Hand weeding POST Treatment

23 Spring 2006 Microstegium cover Percent Microstegium cover 100 a Treatment: P < b c 20 < 1% d 0 Control Hand weeding POST Treatment POST + PRE

24 Fall 2006 Harvest Microstegium biomass 40 Microstegium biomass (g) a Treatment: P < % reduction b % reduction c Control Hand weeding POST Treatment 99.9% reduction c POST + PRE *No difference in Microstegium biomass with seed addition treatment (P = 0.432)

25 Summary: Removal of Microstegium Microstegium Microstegium End of season Spring cover Hand weeding 86.9% reduction POST 99.8% reduction POST + PRE 99.9% reduction

26 Summary: Removal of Microstegium Microstegium Microstegium End of season Spring cover Hand weeding 86.9% reduction 70% POST 99.8% reduction 25% POST + PRE 99.9% reduction < 1%

27 Spring 2006 Native plant cover Percent native plant cover 100 Treatment: P < bc c ab a Col Control Hand weeding POST Treatment POST + PRE *No difference in native cover with seed addition treatment (P = 0.097)

28 Fall 2006 Harvest Native species productivity 5 Native species biomass (g) Treatment: P = Control Hand weeding POST Treatment POST + PRE *Decrease in native species productivity with seed addition treatment (P = 0.051)

29 Fall 2006 Harvest Native species diversity Shannon's Diversity Index (H') a a Treatment: P = ab b Control Hand weeding POST Treatment POST + PRE *No difference in native species diversity with seed addition treatment (P = 0.228)

30 Summary: Impact on native species Spring native Native species Native species productivity diversity cover Hand weeding POST POST + PRE No difference

31 Summary: Impact on native species Spring native Native species Native species productivity diversity cover Hand weeding POST POST + PRE No difference No difference

32 Summary: Impact on native species Spring native Native species Native species productivity diversity cover Hand weeding No difference POST POST + PRE No difference No difference No difference

33 Conclusions Invasions of Microstegium can be eliminated using post-emergent grass specific herbicide followed by a spring application of pre-emergent herbicide Control of Microstegium by this method results in decreased native species diversity but may not affect productivity Further study will determine if repeat applications can eliminate populations over the long term Further data analysis will reveal the influence of environmental conditions on Microstegium abundance and the effectiveness of management and restoration techniques

34 Conclusions Invasions of Microstegium can be eliminated using post-emergent grass specific herbicide followed by a spring application of pre-emergent herbicide Control of Microstegium by this method results in decreased native species diversity but may not affect productivity Further study will determine if repeat applications can eliminate populations over the long term Further data analysis will reveal the influence of environmental conditions on Microstegium abundance and the effectiveness of management and restoration techniques

35 Conclusions Invasions of Microstegium can be eliminated using post-emergent grass specific herbicide followed by a spring application of pre-emergent herbicide Control of Microstegium by this method results in decreased native species diversity but may not affect productivity Further study will determine if repeat applications can eliminate populations over the long term Further data analysis will reveal the influence of environmental conditions on Microstegium abundance and the effectiveness of management and restoration techniques

36 Conclusions Invasions of Microstegium can be eliminated using post-emergent grass specific herbicide followed by a spring application of pre-emergent herbicide Control of Microstegium by this method results in decreased native species diversity but may not affect productivity Further study will determine if repeat applications can eliminate populations over the long term Further data analysis will reveal the influence of environmental conditions on Microstegium abundance and the effectiveness of management and restoration techniques

37 Management Recommendations for Microstegium 1. Monitor natural areas for Microstegium invasions

38 Management Recommendations for Microstegium 1. Monitor natural areas for Microstegium invasions 2. Remove new, isolated Microstegium populations with hand weeding monitor throughout growing season

39 Management Recommendations for Microstegium 1. Monitor natural areas for Microstegium invasions 2. Remove new, isolated Microstegium populations with hand weeding monitor throughout growing season 3. Eradicate large, dense Microstegium invasions with a grass specific post-emergent herbicide

40 Management Recommendations for Microstegium 1. Monitor natural areas for Microstegium invasions 2. Remove new, isolated Microstegium populations with hand weeding monitor throughout growing season 3. Eradicate large, dense Microstegium invasions with a grass specific post-emergent herbicide 4. Apply a pre-emergent herbicide the following spring to well established (large seed bank) Microstegium invasions

41 Acknowledgments Funding USDA, Hoosier National Forest The Nature Conservancy National Wild Turkey Federation Townsend Chemical Division B.F. Floyd Summer Fellowship Research Sites Hoosier National Forest Big Oaks National Wildlife Refuge Morgan-Monroe State Forest Jackson-Washington State Forest Field Assistants Rachel Soukup, Margie Smith, Patrick McGinley, Neena Thomas, Colleen Krga, Melinda Kaelin, Kyle Schneider, Nathan Hyde, Eric Hancock, Laura Stebbins, Rachel Bennett, Simon Flory, Jesse Goode, Tyler Droste, Brandon Hall, Susan Cook, Maria Gaetani, Justin Miller, Wes Abplanab, Rachel Maranto, Julie Rubly, Lindsay Klaunig