Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-12T07:44:54.928Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Ventenata dubia removal on rangelands of northeast Wyoming

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2021

Marshall Hart Open the ORCID record for Marshall Hart [Opens in a new window]  and
Brian A. Mealor
Marshall Hart
Affiliation:
Graduate Assistant, University of Wyoming, Sheridan Research and Extension Center, Sheridan, WY, USA; Institute for Managing Annual Grasses Invading Natural Ecosystems, Sheridan, WY, USA
Brian A. Mealor*
Affiliation:
Associate Professor and Director, University of Wyoming Sheridan Research and Extension Center, Sheridan, WY, USA; Institute for Managing Annual Grasses Invading Natural Ecosystems, Sheridan, WY, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Brian A. Mealor, University of Wyoming Sheridan Research and Extension Center, 1090 Dome Loop, Sheridan, WY82801. (Email: bamealor@uwyo.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ventenata [Ventenata dubia (Leers) Coss.] is one of several annual grass invaders of the western United States. Ventenata dubia is documented reducing the forage availability for livestock and wildlife as well as lowering biodiversity in the Great Basin. This species has recently spread to the Great Plains, where it could bring these impacts with it. We attempt to answer questions on whether or not conservation practices, in this case removal of V. dubia with herbicide, result in recovery of forage resources and biodiversity. We answer these questions by measuring biomass, cover, and nutrient content 1-yr posttreatment at 9 sites in Sheridan County, WY, conducted in two years. Perennial grasses have higher crude protein and total digestible nutrients than V. dubia, and removal of V. dubia resulted in a positive perennial grass response both years. Further, the differences in pattern of growth between perennial and annual species, with annual grasses quickly senescing early in the year, make perennial grasses a more dependable forage base with higher available nutrients. Interestingly, total biomass and nutrient mass did not change after V. dubia removal due to equal replacement with perennial grasses. Species richness and diversity were unaffected by removal of V. dubia. Our results suggest that managing invasive annual grasses, particularly V. dubia, in the Northern Great Plains can improve forage resources for livestock and wildlife while maintaining species diversity. Therefore, proactive monitoring and management efforts to prevent spread should be prioritized in this region.

Keywords

Biodiversityconservationforageinvasive speciesnutrition
Type
Research Article
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 14 , Issue 3 , September 2021 , pp. 156 - 163
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the 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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Lisa J. Rew, Montana State University

This article was originally presented as part of the symposium “The Ecological and Biodiversity Impact of Invasive Grass Species and their Management,” co-chaired by Lisa Rew and Timothy Prather, at the 2020 annual meeting of the Weed Science Society of America.

References

Anderson, JE, Inouye, RS (2001) Landscape-scale changes in plant species abundance and biodiversity of a sagebrush steppe over 45 years. Ecol Monogr 71:531–556 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Technology, ANKOM (2017) Acid Detergent Fiber in Feeds - Filter Bag Technique (for A200 and A200I). Macedon, NY: ANKOM Technology. https://www.ankom.com/sites/default/files/document-files/Method_5_ADF_A200.pdf. Accessed: September 3, 2020Google Scholar
Barkworth, ME, Capels, KM, Long, S (1993) Ventenata. Pages 683–684 in Barkworth ME, Capels KM, Long S, Anderton LK, eds. Flora of North America. Volume 24, Magnoliophyta: Commelinidae (in part): Poaceae. Part 1, North of Mexico. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Choi, YD, Temperton, VM, Allen, EB, Grootjans, AP, Halassy, M, Hobbs, RJ, Naeth, AM, Torok, K (2008) Ecological restoration for future sustainability in a changing environment. Écoscience 15:53–64 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, YD (2007) Restoration ecology to the future: a call for new paradigm. Restor Ecol 15:351–353 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, SL, Sebastian, DJ, Nissen, SJ, Sebastian, JR (2019) Effect of indaziflam on native species in natural areas and rangeland. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 12:60–67 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Antonio, CM, Vitousek, PM (1992) Biological invasions by exotic grasses, the grass/fire cycle, and global change. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 23:63–87 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiTomaso, JM, Monaco, TA, James, JJ, Firn, J (2017) Invasive plant species and novel rangeland systems. Pages 429–465 in Lawrence RW, Howarth RW, Lawrence AK, eds. Rangeland Systems. Cham, Switzerland: SpringerGoogle Scholar
Evans, RA, Holbo, HR, Eckert, RE Jr, Young, JA (1970) Functional environment of downy brome communities in relation to weed control and revegetation. Weed Sci 18:154–162 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fryer, JL (2017) Ventenata dubia. Fire Effects Information System. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Missoula Fire Sciences Laboratory. www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/graminoid/vendub/all.html. Accessed: January 28, 2020Google Scholar
Garner, L, Lakes, S (2019) Early Detection and Rapid Response to New Invasive Grasses in North Central Wyoming. United States Fish and Wildlife Service Report for the National Invasive Species Council Secretariat. https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/wyoming_invasive_grasses_report.pdf. Accessed: March 11, 2021Google Scholar
Haferkamp, MR, Grings, EE, Heitschmidt, RK, Macneil, MD, Karl, MG (2001) Suppression of annual bromes impacts rangeland: animal responses. J Range Manage 54:663–668 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobbs, RJ (2007) Setting effective and realistic restoration goals: key directions for research. Restor Ecol 15:354–357 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hironaka, M (1992) Medusahead: natural successor to the cheatgrass type in the northern Great Basin. Pages 89–91 in Proceedings 313: Ecology and Management of Annual Rangelands. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest ServiceGoogle Scholar
Jensen, KB, Robins, JG, Rigby, C, Waldron, BL (2016) Comparative trends in forage nutritional quality across the growing season in 13 grasses. Can J Plant Sci 97:72–82 Google Scholar
Jones, LC, Davis, C, Prather, TS (2020) Consequences of Ventenata dubia 30 years postinvasion to bunchgrass communities in the Pacific Northwest. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 13:226–238 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, LC, Norton, N, Prather, TS (2018) Indicators of ventenata (Ventenata dubia) invasion in sagebrush steppe rangelands. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 11:1–9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A (2014) Developing a Decision Support Tool for Ventenata (Ventenata dubia) Integrated Pest Management in the Inland Northwest. MS thesis. Moscow: University of Idaho. 80 pGoogle Scholar
McCurdy, DE, Watts, CJ, Chibisa, GE, Prather, TS, Laarman, AH (2017) Feed processing affects palatability of ventenata-infested grass hay. J Anim Sci 95:295 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melgoza, G, Nowak, RS, Tausch, RJ (1990) Soil water exploitation after fire: competition between Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass) and two native species. Oecologia 83:7–13 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Novak, SJ, Cristofaro, M, Maguire, D, Sforza, RFH (2015) The invasive grass ventenata (Ventenata dubia): a new threat for Nevada. http://agri.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/agrinvgov/Content/Plant/Noxious_Weeds/Documents/Novak%20et%20al.%20Nevada%20Weed%20Management%20Association%20Conference%202015.pdf. Accessed: June 15, 2020Google Scholar
Padmore, JM (1990) Protein (crude) in animal feed—combustion method, method no. 990.03. Arlington, VA: Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists AOAC. Vol. 15, pp 3–4Google Scholar
Pavek, P, Wallace, J, Prather, T (2011) Ventenata biology and distribution in the Pacific Northwest. Page 107 in Proceedings of the Western Society of Weed Science. Spokane, WA: Western Society of Weed ScienceGoogle Scholar
R Core Team (2016) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org Google Scholar
Scheinost, P, Stannard, M, Prather, T (2008a) Ventenata, Ventenata dubia (Leers) Coss. USDA-NRCS Pullman Plant Materials Center. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_PLANTMATERIALS/publications/wapmcpg8372.pdf. Accessed: September 27, 2018Google Scholar
Scheinost, P, Stannard, M, Prather, T, Yenish, J (2008b) Ventenata. Pullman, WA: Washington State University Extension Publication EB2038E. Pp 1–2Google Scholar
Sebastian, DJ, Fleming, MB, Patterson, EL, Sebastian, JR, Nissen, SJ (2017) Indaziflam: a new cellulose-biosynthesis-inhibiting herbicide provides long-term control of invasive winter annual grasses. Pest Manag Sci 73:2149–2162 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sebastian, DJ, Scott, JN, Juliana, DR (2016a) Pre-emergence control of six invasive winter annual grasses with imazapic and indaziflam. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 9:308–316 Google Scholar
Sebastian, DJ, Sebastian, JR, Nissen, SJ, Beck, KG (2016b) A potential new herbicide for invasive annual grass control on rangeland. Rangeland Ecol Manag 69:195–198 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shannon, CE (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal 27:379–423 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheley, RL, James, JJ, Rinella, MJ, Blumenthal, D, DiTomaso, JM, Briske, DD (2011) Invasive Plant Management on Anticipated Conservation Benefits: A Scientific Assessment. Conservation Benefits of Rangeland Practices: Assessment, Recommendations, and Knowledge Gaps. Washington, DC: USDA-NRCS. Pp 291–336Google Scholar
[USDA-NRCS] U.S. Department of Agriculture–Natural Resources Conservation Service (2019) Web Soil Survey. http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov. Accessed February 27, 2021Google Scholar
Wallace, JM, Pavek, PL, Prather, TS (2015) Ecological characteristics of Ventenata dubia in the Intermountain Pacific Northwest. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 8:57–71 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, JM, Prather, TS (2016) Herbicide control strategies for Ventenata dubia in the Intermountain Pacific Northwest. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 9:128–137 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board (2016) Written Findings of the Draft Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board. Proposed Noxious Weed for 2016. https://www.nwcb.wa.gov/images/weeds/Ventenata_dubia_written_findings_final.pdf. Accessed: September 27, 2018Google Scholar
Young, JA (1992) Ecology and management of medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae ssp. asperum [Simk.] Melderis). Great Basin Nat 52:245–252 Google Scholar
Young, JA, Allen, FL (1997) Cheatgrass and range science: 1930–1950. J Range Manage 50:530–535 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Hart and Mealor supplementary material

Table S1

Download Hart and Mealor supplementary material(File)
File 14.5 KB