Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T19:58:42.690Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Integration of Prescribed Burning, Aminopyralid, and Reseeding for Restoration of Yellow Starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis)-Infested Rangeland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Guy B. Kyser ,
Arthur Hazebrook  and
Joseph M. DiTomaso
Guy B. Kyser
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, CA 95616
Arthur Hazebrook
Affiliation:
General Dynamics Information Technology, Fort Hunter Liggett, CA 93928
Joseph M. DiTomaso*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, CA 95616
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: jmditomaso@ucdavis.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) is among the most invasive plant species in the western United States. The long-term management of yellow starthistle should include an integrated approach that incorporates establishment of competitive vegetation. In this study, conducted in two locations at Fort Hunter Liggett in Monterey County, California, we evaluated the combination of prescribed burning, the herbicide aminopyralid, and reseeding of native broadleaf and grass species on both yellow starthistle control and native plant restoration. Both study sites were burned in late October 2009. Over the following season, aminopyralid was applied at three timings and native plant species were seeded at three timings, using both a drill-seeder and broadcast spreader. Evaluations over the next 3 yr showed that aminopyralid provided complete to nearly complete control of yellow starthistle when applied between January and March, and this level of control was maintained for two seasons. Native plants failed to establish when broadcast seeded, regardless of the timing. December and January drill seeding timings were the most successful in establishing native species. There was a strong herbicide and drill seed timing interaction effect on native grass cover at both study sites. Over the course of the study the native perennial grass Stipa cernua was the most successful seeded species to establish, but establishment was slow and required 3 yr. Our results indicate that a January or March aminopyralid treatment integrated with a native perennial grass drill seeding program in January offers the greatest probability of both successful yellow starthistle control and perennial grass establishment.

Keywords

Aminopyralidyellow starthistle, Centaurea solstitialis L.Stipa cernua Stebbins & LoveHerbicideinvasiveprescribed firerangelandrestorationweed control
Type
Research
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , December 2013 , pp. 480 - 491
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

Almquist, T. L. and Lym, R. G. 2010. Effect of aminopyralid on Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) and the native plant community in a restored tallgrass prairie. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 3:155–168.Google Scholar
Bakker, J. D. and Wilson, S. D. 2004. Using ecological restoration to constrain biological invasion. J. Appl. Ecol. 41:1058–1064.Google Scholar
Baldwin, B. G., Goldman, D. H., Keil, D. J., Patterson, R., Rosatti, T. J., and Wilken, D. H., eds. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, 2nd Ed. Berkeley, CA University of California Press. 1568 p.Google Scholar
Brooks, M. L. 2002. Peak fire temperatures and effects on annual plants in the Mojave Desert. Ecol. Appl. 12:1088–1102.Google Scholar
Bukun, B., Gaines, T. A., Nissen, S. J., Westra, P., Brunk, G., Shaner, D. L., Sleugh, B. B., and Peterson, V. F. 2009. Aminopyralid and clopyralid absorption and translocation in Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Weed Sci. 57:10–15.Google Scholar
Connolly, T. J. 2000. Anthropological and archaeological perspectives on native fire management of the Willamette Valley. Pages 1–12 in 81st Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Pacific Division, Ashland, Oregon. http://www.orww.org/Kalapuya-Amin_2006/Program/ConnollyT/Indian_Burning_20000611.pdf Google Scholar
Cox, R. D. and Anderson, V. J. 2004. Increasing native diversity of cheatgrass-dominated rangeland through assisted succession. J. Range Manag. 57:203–210.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M., Brooks, M. L., Allen, E. B., Minnich, R., Rice, R. M., and Kyser, G. B. 2006a. Control of invasive weeds with prescribed burning. Weed Technol. 20:535–548.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M. and Kyser, G. B. 2006. Evaluation of imazapyr and aminopyralid for invasive plant management. Proc. Calif. Weed Sci. Soc. 58:108–109.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M., Kyser, G. B., and Hastings, M. S. 1999a. Prescribed burning for control of yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) and enhanced native plant diversity. Weed Sci. 47:233–242.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M., Kyser, G. B., Miller, J. R., Garcia, S., Smith, R. F., Nader, G., Connor, J. M., and Orloff, S. B. 2006b. Integrating prescribed burning and clopyralid for the management of yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis). Weed Sci. 54:757–767.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M., Kyser, G. B., Orloff, S. B., Enloe, S. F., and Nader, G. A. 1999b. New growth regulator herbicide provides excellent control of yellow starthistle. Calif. Agr. 53(2):12–16.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M., Kyser, G. B., Orloff, S. B., and Enloe, S. F. 2000. Integrated strategies offer site-specific control of yellow starthistle. Calif. Agr. 54(6):30–36.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M., Kyser, G. B., and Pitcairn, M. J. 2006c. Yellow Starthistle Management Guide. Cal-IPC Publication #2006-03. California Invasive Plant Council: Berkeley, CA. 65 p. www.cal-ipc.org. Accessed January 1, 2013.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 Economic, Environmental and Societal Losses from Invasive Plants on Rangeland and Wildlands. Weed Technol. 18:1411–1416.Google Scholar
Enloe, S. F., DiTomaso, J. M., Orloff, S., and Drake, D. 2005. Perennial grass establishment integrated with clopyralid treatment for yellow starthistle management on annual range. Weed Technol. 19:94–101.Google Scholar
Enloe, S. F., Kyser, G. B., Dewey, S. A., Peterson, V. F., and DiTomaso, J. M. 2008. Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens) control with low rates of aminopyralid on range and pasture. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 1:385–389.Google Scholar
Kyser, G. B., DiTomaso, J. M., Doran, M. P., Orloff, S. B., Wilson, R. G., Lancaster, D., Lile, D., and Porath, M. 2007. Control of medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) and other annual grasses with imazapic. Weed Technol. 21:66–75.Google Scholar
Kyser, G. B., Peterson, V. F., Davy, J. S., and DiTomaso, J. M. 2012. Preemergent control of medusahead on California annual rangelands with aminopyralid. Rangeland Ecol. Manag. 65:418–425.Google Scholar
Kyser, G. B., Peterson, V., Orloff, S. B., Wright, S. D., and DiTomaso, J. M. 2011. Control of yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) and coast fiddleneck (Amsinckia menziesii) with aminopyralid. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 4:341–348.Google Scholar
Osborne, M. 1998. Integrated Training Area Management (ITAM) program, Fort Hunter Liggett, California. Land Condition Trend Analysis (LCTA) component. Annual Report, Center for Ecological Management of Military Lands. Fort Collins, CO Colorado State University Press, http://www.liggett.army.mil/sites/dptms/rtla.asp. Assessed January 1, 2013.Google Scholar
Reever-Morghan, K. J. and Rice, K. J. 2005. Centaurea solstitialis invasion success is influenced by Nassella pulchra size. Restor. Ecol. 13:524–528.Google Scholar
Senseman, S. A., ed. 2007. Herbicide Handbook, Ninth Edition. Lawrence, KS Weed Science Society of America. 458 p.Google Scholar
Sheley, R. L., Bingham, B. S., and Davies, K. W. 2012. Rehabilitating medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) infested rangeland using a single-entry approach. Weed Sci. 60:612–617.Google Scholar
Simmons, M. T., Windhager, S., Power, P., Lott, J., Lyons, R. K., and Schwope, C. 2007. Selective and non-selective control of invasive plants: The short-term effects of growing-season prescribed fire, herbicide, and mowing in two Texas prairies. Restor. Ecol. 15:662–669.Google Scholar
Stechman, J. V. 1983. Fire hazard reduction practices for annual-type grassland. Rangelands 5:56–58.Google Scholar
Stromberg, M. R., D'Antonio, C. M., Young, T. P., Wirka, J., and Kephart, P. R. 2007. California grassland restoration. Pages 254–280 in California Grasslands. Ecology and Management, Stromberg, M. R., Corbin, J. D., and D'Antonio, C. M., eds, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Williams, G. W. 2000. Early fire use in Oregon. Fire Manag. 60:13–20.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. G., Orloff, S. B., Lancaster, D. L., Kirby, D. W., and Carlson, H. L. 2010. Integrating herbicide use and perennial grass revegetation to suppress weeds in noncrop areas. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 3:81–92.Google Scholar
Young, S. L., Barney, J. N., Kyser, G. B., Jones, T. S., and DiTomaso, J. M. 2009. Functionally similar species confer greater resistance to invasion: implications for grassland restoration. Restor. Ecol. 17:884–892.Google Scholar