Vegetatio

, Volume 57, Issue 2–3, pp 91–101

Patterns and mechanisms of plant succession after fire on Artemisia-grass sites in southeastern Idaho

  • L. David Humphrey
Article

Abstract

Cover data for plant species on eight environmentally similar sites that were each burned in a different year (from 2 to 36 years ago) were used to construct a composite sequence of vegetational change after fire on Artemisia-grassland sites in southeastern Idaho. Some species were early successional such as Lithospermum ruderale, and some late successional: Artemisia tridentata, A. tripartita, and Gutierreza sarothrae. But many species: Purshia tridentata, Symphoricarpos oreophilus, Amelanchier alnifolia, Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus, Achillea millefolium, Agropyron dasystachyum, and A. spicatum were present in both early and later stages. Shannon and Simpson indices of diversity and species richness indicated little change in alpha diversity through time. This was attributed mainly to the limited change in species composition from early to later stages. The general pattern of succession is compatible with the tolerance model of Connell & Slatyer (1977) in most respects. Species traits relating to persistence through a disturbance or re-establishment on the site, and tolerance of competition shape the course of succession on a site. Perennial grasses and forbs which sprout from the base after fire are the first species to dominate the sites. Sprouting shrubs, which require some years to regrow to their pre-fire form, are prominent by the sixth year. Shrubs which rely on dispersal become co-dominants in later stages, at which time some herbaceous species are reduced oreliminated. The pattern of succession can differ due to presence or absence of species with particular traits.

Keywords

Agropyron Artemisia Fire Mechanisms Model Pattern Species traits Succession Vital attributes 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allison, L. E., 1965. Organic carbon. In: C. A., Black (ed.), Methods of soil analysis, pp. 1367–1378. Agron, 9. Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, Wis.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, J. E. & Holte, K. E., 1981. Vegetation development over 25 years without grazing on sagebrush-dominated rangeland in southeastern Idaho. J. Range Manage. 34: 25–29.Google Scholar
  3. Arnold, J. F., Jameson, D. A. & Reid, E. H., 1964. The pinyon-juniper type of Arizona: effects of grazing, fire and tree control, U.S.D.A. Prod. Res. Rep. 84.Google Scholar
  4. Barney, M. A. & Frischknecht, N. C., 1974. Vegetation changes following fire in the pinyon-juniper type of west-central Utah. J. Range Manage. 27: 91–96.Google Scholar
  5. Blaisdell, J. P., 1953. Ecological effects of planned burning of sagebrush-grass range on the upper Snake River plains. U.S.D.A. Tech. Bull. 1075.Google Scholar
  6. Blaisdell, J. P. & Mueggler, W. F., 1956. Sprouting of bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata) following burning or top removal. Ecology 37: 365–370.Google Scholar
  7. Bouyoucos, G. J., 1939. Directions for making mechanical analyses of soils by the hydrometer method. Soil Sci. 42: 225–229.Google Scholar
  8. Bray, J. R. & Curtis, J. T., 1957. An ordination of the upland forest communities of southern Wisconsin. Ecol. Monogr. 27: 325–349.Google Scholar
  9. Campbell, B. M. & Meulen, F.van der, 1980. Patterns of plant species diversity in fynbos vegetation, South Africa. Vegetatio 43: 43–47.Google Scholar
  10. Cattelino, P. J., Noble, I. R., Slatyer, R. O. & Kessell, S. R., 1979. Predicting the multiple pathways of plant succession. Environ. Manage. 3: 41–50.Google Scholar
  11. Clements, F. E., 1916. Plant succession. Carnegie Inst. Wash. Publ. 242, Washington, D.C. 512 pp.Google Scholar
  12. Connell, J. H. & Slatyer, R. O., 1977. Mechanisms of succession in natural communities and their role in community stability and organization. Amer. Nat. 111: 1119–1144.Google Scholar
  13. Daubenmire, R. F., 1975. Ecology of Artemisia tridentata subsp. tridentata in the state of Washington. Nw. Sci. 49: 24–35.Google Scholar
  14. Drury, W. H. & Nisbet, I. C. T., 1973. Succession. J. Arnold Arboretum 54: 331–368.Google Scholar
  15. Egler, F. E., 1954. Vegetation science concepts. I. Initial floristic composition a factor in old field vegetation development. Vegetatio 4: 412–417.Google Scholar
  16. Erdman, J. A., 1970. Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires on residual soils of Mesa Verde, Colorado. Brigham Young Univ. Sci. Bull. Biol. Ser. 11, 2: 1–24.Google Scholar
  17. Frischknecht, N. C., 1968. Grazing intensities and systems on crested wheatgrass in central Utah: response of vegetation and cattle. U.S.D.A. Tech. Bull. 1388.Google Scholar
  18. Garrison, G. A., Bjugstad, A. J., Duncan, D. A., Lewis, M. E. & Smith, D. R., 1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range ecosystems, U.S.D.A. Agric. Handb. 475, 68 pp.Google Scholar
  19. Gleason, H. A., 1926. The individualistic concept of the plant association. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 53: 7–26.Google Scholar
  20. Gleason, H. A., 1927. Further views on the succession concept. Ecology 8: 299–326.Google Scholar
  21. Glenn-Lewin, D. C., 1980. The individualistic nature of plant community development. Vegetatio 43: 141–146.Google Scholar
  22. Grime, J. P., 1977. Evidence for the existence of three primary strategies in plants and its relevance to ecological and evolutionary theory. Amer. Nat. 111: 1169–1194.Google Scholar
  23. Hanes, T. L., 1971. Succession after fire in the chaparral of southern California. Ecol. Monogr. 41: 27–52.Google Scholar
  24. Harniss, R. O. & Murray, R. B., 1973. Thirty years of vegetal change following burning of sagebrush-grass range. J. Range Manage. 26: 322–325.Google Scholar
  25. Hill, M. O., 1973. Diversity and evenness: a unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology 54: 427–432.Google Scholar
  26. Hitchcock, C. L. & Cronquist, A., 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, 730 pp.Google Scholar
  27. Hulst, R.van, 1978. On the dynamics of vegetation: patterns of environmental and vegetational change. Vegetatio 38: 65–75.Google Scholar
  28. Küchler, A. W., 1964. Potential natural vegetation of the conterminous United States. (Manual and map). Am. Geogr. Soc. Spec. Publ. 36, 1965 rev., New York, 116 pp.Google Scholar
  29. Lyon, L. J. & Stickney, P. L., 1976. Early vegetal succession following large northern Rocky Mountain wildfires. Proc. Montana Tall Timbers Fire Ecol. Conf. and Fire and Land Management Symp. 14: 355–375.Google Scholar
  30. Noble, I. R. & Slatyer, R. O., 1977. Post fire succession of plants in Mediterranean ecosystems. In: H. A. Mooney & C. E. Conrad (eds.), Proc. Symp. Environmental Consequences of Fire and Fuel Management in Mediterranean Ecosystems. pp. 27–36, U.S.D.A. Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-3.Google Scholar
  31. Noble, I. R. & Slatyer, R. O., 1978. The effect of disturbance on plant succession. Proc. Ecol. Soc. Aust. 10: 135–145.Google Scholar
  32. Noble, I. R. & Slatyer, R. O., 1980. The use of vital attributes to predict successional changes in plant communities subject to recurrent disturbances. Vegetatio 43: 5–21.Google Scholar
  33. Odum, E. P., 1969. The strategy of ecosystem development. Science 164: 262–270.Google Scholar
  34. Pechanec, J. F., Stewart, G. & Blaisdell, J. P., 1948. Sagebrush burning good and bad. U.S.D.A. Farmers' Bull. 32 pp.Google Scholar
  35. Peet, R. K., 1974. The measurement of species diversity. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 5: 285–307.Google Scholar
  36. Purdie, R. W., 1977. Early stages of regeneration after burning in dry sclerophyll vegetation. I. Regeneration of the understorey by vegetative means. Aust. J. Bot. 25: 21–34.Google Scholar
  37. Purdie, R. W. & Slatyer, R. O., 1976. Vegetation succession after fire in sclerophyll woodland communities in southeastern Australia. Aust. J. Ecol. 1: 223–236.Google Scholar
  38. Rice, E. L. & Kelting, R. W., 1955. The species-area curve. Ecology 36: 7–11.Google Scholar
  39. Shannon, C. E. & Weaver, W., 1949. The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press. Urbana, Illinois. 117 pp.Google Scholar
  40. Wright, H. A., Neuenschwander, L. F. & Britton, C. M., 1979. The role and use of fire in sagebrush-grass and pinyon-juniper plant communities a state-of-the-art review, U.S.D.A. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-58.Google Scholar
  41. Young, J. A. & Evans, R. A., 1978. Population dynamics after wildfires in sagebrush grasslands. J. Range Manage. 31: 283–289.Google Scholar
  42. Zedler, P. H., 1977. Life history attributes of plants and the fire cycle: a case study in chaparral dominated by Cupress forbesii. In: H. A. Mooney & C. E. Conrad (eds.), Proc. Symp. Environmental Consequences of Fire and Fuel Management in Mediterranean Ecosystems, pp. 451–458, U.S.D.A. Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-3.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Dr W. Junk Publishers 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. David Humphrey
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyIdaho State UniversityPocatelloUSA
  2. 2.BufordUSA

Personalised recommendations