Effects of Established Perennial Grasses on Introduction of Native Forbs in California

Abstract Prairie restoration is not complete without the establishment of both grasses and forbs. However, if desirable forbs and grasses are seeded simultaneously, control of broadleaf weeds is problematic. If possible, a two‐step process of introducing forbs after establishing grasses would allow use of broadleaf‐specific herbicides at the critical early stages of grass growth. We conducted experiments to investigate methods for introducing forbs into previously restored native perennial grasslands on rural roadsides in the Sacramento Valley of California. In one experiment, we studied the effects of background vegetation (established perennial grasses or tilled ground) on seven native forb species planted from seed. In a second experiment, we evaluated the effects of background vegetation (existing perennial grasses or tilled ground) and container size (36 ml or 105 ml) with excavation technique (excavation by core removal [core] or by creating an impression [dibble]) on the growth of transplants of the native perennial forbs Asclepias fascicularis and Sisyrinchium bellum. The presence of established perennial grasses reduced the growth of seeded forbs, but did not affect transplants, indicating the vulnerability of seedling forbs to interference. When compared to control plots that had been tilled in the autumn, weed canopy cover was significantly lower in the presence of perennial grasses if seeded with forbs, but not in the presence of perennial grasses alone. Both transplanted species grew better in the large container/core treatment than the small container/dibble treatment; however, existing grasses eliminated these positive effects. Asclepias fascicularis performed better when grown in large containers than in small containers, but its growth was not affected by excavation method; S. bellum performed better when planted with the core method than the dibble method of excavation, but container size made no difference. We attribute differences in the responses of the species to interactions between phenological differences and expansive clay soils that naturally de‐compact upon drying.