Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-t82dr Total loading time: 0.255 Render date: 2021-12-04T10:58:55.081Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Effect of Aminopyralid on Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) and the Native Plant Community in a Restored Tallgrass Prairie

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Travis L. Almquist
Affiliation:
Plant Sciences Department, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105
Rodney G. Lym*
Affiliation:
Plant Sciences Department, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: Rod.Lym@ndsu.edu

Abstract

Aminopyralid efficacy on Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) and potential to injure native species was evaluated in a restored prairie at the Glacial Ridge Preserve managed by The Nature Conservancy in Polk County, MN. Canada thistle stem density was reduced from 17 to 0.1 stems m−2 10 mo after treatment (MAT) with aminopyralid applied in the fall at 120 g ha−1. Aminopyralid also altered the composition of both Canada thistle–infested and native plant communities. Aminopyralid controlled Canada thistle and removed or reduced several undesirable forb species from the restored prairie communities, such as absinth wormwood (Artemisia absinthium) and perennial sowthistle (Sonchus arvensis). A number of high seral forbs were also reduced or removed by aminopyralid, including maximilian sunflower (Helianthus maximiliani) and purple prairie clover (Dalea purpurea). Foliar cover of high seral forbs in the native plant community was reduced from 12.2 to 7% 22 MAT. The cover of high seral grass species, such as big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) and Indiangrass (Sorghastrum nutans) increased after aminopyralid application in both the Canada thistle–infested and native plant communities and averaged 41.4% cover compared with only 19.4% before removal of Canada thistle. Species richness, evenness, and diversity were reduced after aminopyralid application in both Canada thistle–infested and native plant communities. However, the benefits of Canada thistle control, removal of undesirable species, and the increase in native grass cover should lead to an overall improvement in the long-term stability and composition of the restored prairie plant community, which likely outweigh the short-term effects of a Canada thistle control program.

Type
Research
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.)

Footnotes

Current address: School of Biological Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-4236

References

Ang, B. N., Kok, L. T., Holtzman, G. I., and Wolf, D. D. 1994. Competitive growth of Canada thistle, tall fescue, and crownvetch in the presence of a thistle defoliator, Cassida rubiginosa Muller (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Biol. Control 4:277284.Google Scholar
Bork, E. W., Grekul, C. W., and DeBruijn, S. L. 2007. Extended pasture forage sward responses to Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) control using herbicides and fertilization. Crop Prot 26:15461555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bragg, T. B. 1995. The physical environment of the Great Plains grasslands. Pages 4761. in Joern, A. and Keeler, K. H. eds. The Changing Prairie: North American Grasslands. New York Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Carrithers, V. F., Burch, P. L., Cline, W. N., Masters, R. A., Nelson, J. A., Halstvedt, M. B., Troth, J. L., and Breuninger, J. M. 2005. Aminopyralid: a new reduced risk active ingredient for control of broadleaf invasive and noxious weeds. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci 58:5960.Google Scholar
Duncan, C., Kulla, A., Halstvedt, M., and Masters, R. A. 2009. Effect of aminopyralid on non-target vegetation after aerial application. Proc. Soc. Range Manage. Annual Meeting 62:7075. http://www.srmmeetings.org/pdf_Abstracts/tech70_invasiveSpecies/70_5.pdf. Accessed May 19, 2009.Google Scholar
Enloe, S. F., Lym, R. G., Wilson, R., et al. 2007. Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) control with aminopyralid in range, pasture, and noncrop areas. Weed Technol 21:890894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Great Plains Flora Association 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Lawrence, KS University Press Kansas.Google Scholar
Gurevitch, J., Scheiner, S. M., and Fox, G. A. 2006. Biomes. Pages 417443. in. The Ecology of Plants. 2nd ed. Sunderland, MA Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Hill, M. O. 1973. Diversity and evenness: a unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology 54:427432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobbs, R. J. and Huenneke, L. F. 1992. Disturbance, diversity, and invasion: implications for conservation. Conserv. Biol 6:324337.Google Scholar
Joern, A. and Keeler, K. H. 1995a. Getting the lay of the land: introducing North American native grasslands. Pages 1124. in Joern, A. and Keeler, K. H. eds. The Changing Prairie: North American Grasslands. New York Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Joern, A. and Keeler, K. H. 1995b. Introduction. Pages 38. in Joern, A. and Keeler, K. H. eds. The Changing Prairie: North American Grasslands. New York Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lym, R. G. 2009. Aminopyralid applied at the maximum use rate for Canada thistle control. Prog. Rep. West. Soc. Weed Sci. P. 38.Google Scholar
McCune, B. and Grace, J. B. 2002. Analysis of Ecological Communities. Glenden Beach, OR MjM Software Design. 125142.Google Scholar
Naeem, S., Knops, J. M. H., Tilman, D., Howe, K. M., Kennedy, T., and Gale, S. 2000. Plant diversity increases resistance to invasion in the absence of covarying extrinsic factors. Oikos 91:97108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Cooperative Soil Survey 2004. Soil Survey of Polk County, MN. U.S. Department of Agriculture. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. Accessed December 4, 2007.Google Scholar
Northern Great Plains Floristic Quality Assessment Panel 2001. Floristic Quality Assessment of Plants for North Dakota, South Dakota (Excluding the Black Hills), and Adjacent Grasslands. Jamestown, ND Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Online. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/plants/fqa/index.htm (Version 26JAN2001). Accessed May 23, 2008.Google Scholar
Pielou, E. C. 1969. An Introduction to Mathematical Ecology. New York John Wiley and Sons. 292.Google Scholar
Pritekel, C., Whittemore-Olson, A., Snow, N., and Moore, J. C. 2006. Impacts from invasive plant species and their control on the plant community and belowground ecosystem at Rocky Mountain National Park, USA. Appl. Soil Ecol 32:132141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rinella, M. J., Pokorny, M. L., and Rekaya, R. 2007. Grassland invader responses to realistic changes in native species richness. Ecol. App 17:18241831.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rose, K. K., Hild, A. L., Whitson, T. D., Koch, D. W., and Van Tassell, L. 2001. Competitive effects of cool-season grasses on re-establishment of three weed species. Weed Technol 15:885891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sampson, F. and Knopf, F. 1994. Prairie conservation in North America. Bioscience 44:418421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuel, L. W. and Lym, R. G. 2008. Aminopyralid effect on Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) and native species. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag 1:265278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[USDA-NRCS] U.S. Department of Agriculture/Natural Resources Conservation Service 2008. The PLANTS Database. National Plant Data Center. Baton Rouge, LA. http://plants.usda.gov/index.html. Accessed December 21, 2008.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. G., Burch, P., Carrithers, V., Duncan, C., Masters, R. A., and Whitson, T. 2005. Canada thistle control with aminopyralid. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci 58:62.Google Scholar
21
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Effect of Aminopyralid on Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) and the Native Plant Community in a Restored Tallgrass Prairie
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Effect of Aminopyralid on Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) and the Native Plant Community in a Restored Tallgrass Prairie
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Effect of Aminopyralid on Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) and the Native Plant Community in a Restored Tallgrass Prairie
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *