2020Restoration EcologyRequires access

Super‐abundant C 4 grasses are a mixed blessing in restored prairies

Emily Grman, Chad R. Zirbel, Jonathan T. Bauer, Anna M. Groves, Tyler Bassett, Lars A. Brudvig

Open publisher page 62 citations

Abstract

Forbs comprise most of the plant diversity in North American tallgrass prairie and provide vital ecosystem services, but their abundance in prairie restorations is highly variable. Restoration practitioners typically sow C 4 grasses in high abundances because they are inexpensive, provide fuel for prescribed fires, can dominate reference sites, and suppress weeds that suppress sown forbs. However, C 4 grasses can also suppress sown forbs, calling this practice into question. We evaluated how C 4 grasses influence the abundance and diversity of sown forbs in 78 restored prairies across Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan. We found that the direct negative effects of C 4 grasses on sown forbs outweighed indirect positive effects that occurred as C 4 grasses suppressed nonsown species, which in turn suppressed sown forbs. This pattern was especially strong for the C 4 grass big bluestem ( Andropogon gerardii ). Therefore, strategies to promote big bluestem and other C 4 grasses would not promote sown forbs. Although C 4 grass cover was not strongly related to two hypothesized drivers (time since fire or site age), seeding density of C 4 grasses increased their cover. Sown forb cover also increased with forb seeding density, increased indirectly with fire (through its negative effect on nonsown species), and decreased indirectly with soil water‐holding capacity (through its positive effect on nonsown species). These results highlight the complex interplay of species groups during grassland restoration and show how managers can promote sown forbs in restored prairies: increasing forb seeding density and reducing time since fire and the abundance of C 4 grasses and weeds.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Forbs comprise most of the plant diversity in North American tallgrass prairie and provide vital ecosystem services, but their abundance in prairie restorations is highly variable. Restoration practitioners typically sow C 4 grasses in high abundances because they are inexpensive, provide fuel for prescribed fires, can dominate reference sites, and suppress weeds that suppress sown forbs. However, C 4 grasses can also suppress sown forbs, calling this practice into question. We evaluated how C 4 grasses influence the abundance and diversity of sown forbs in 78 restored prairies across Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan. We found that the direct negative effects of C 4 grasses on sown forbs outweighed indirect positive effects that occurred as C 4 grasses suppressed nonsown species, which in turn suppressed sown forbs. This pattern was especially strong for the C 4 grass big bluestem ( Andropogon gerardii ). Therefore, strategies to promote big bluestem and other C 4 grasses would not promote sown forbs. Although C 4 grass cover was not strongly related to two hypothesized drivers (time since fire or site age), seeding density of C 4 grasses increased their cover. Sown forb cover also increased with forb seeding density, increased indirectly with fire (through its negative effect on nonsown species), and decreased indirectly with soil water‐holding capacity (through its positive effect on nonsown species). These results highlight the complex interplay of species groups during grassland restoration and show how managers can promote sown forbs in restored prairies: increasing forb seeding density and reducing time since fire and the abundance of C 4 grasses and weeds.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 62 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Forbs comprise most of the plant diversity in North American tallgrass prairie and provide vital ecosystem services, but their abundance in prairie restorations is highly variable. Restoration practitioners typically sow C 4 grasses in high abundances because they are inexpensive, provide fuel for prescribed fires, can dominate reference sites, and suppress weeds that suppress sown forbs. However, C 4 grasses can also suppress sown forbs, calling this practice into question. We evaluated how C 4 grasses influence the abundance and diversity of sown forbs in 78 restored prairies across Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan. We found that the direct negative effects of C 4 grasses on sown forbs outweighed indirect positive effects that occurred as C 4 grasses suppressed nonsown species, which in turn suppressed sown forbs. This pattern was especially strong for the C 4 grass big bluestem ( Andropogon gerardii ). Therefore, strategies to promote big bluestem and other C 4 grasses would not promote sown forbs. Although C 4 grass cover was not strongly related to two hypothesized drivers (time since fire or site age), seeding density of C 4 grasses increased their cover. Sown forb cover also increased with forb seeding density, increased indirectly with fire (through its negative effect on nonsown species), and decreased indirectly with soil water‐holding capacity (through its positive effect on nonsown species). These results highlight the complex interplay of species groups during grassland restoration and show how managers can promote sown forbs in restored prairies: increasing forb seeding density and reducing time since fire and the abundance of C 4 grasses and weeds.

Key concepts: Forb, Andropogon, Grassland, Abundance (ecology), Agronomy, Biology, Ecology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Super‐abundant C 4 grasses are a mixed blessing in restored prairies — Research Paper | ScholarLens