Advertisement

Ecosystems

, Volume 9, Issue 8, pp 1231–1241 | Cite as

Agricultural Legacies in the Great Basin Alter Vegetation Cover, Composition, and Response to Precipitation

  • Andrew J. ElmoreEmail author
  • John F. Mustard
  • Steven P. Hamburg
  • Sara J. Manning
Article

Abstract

The land-use history of an ecosystem influences current structure and possibly response to modern disturbances and stresses. In semiarid systems the nature of land-use legacies is poorly understood, confounding efforts to establish sustainable management approaches. We compare previously cultivated and non-cultivated lands in Owens Valley, California, where cultivation once extended to 34% of the valley floor but was largely discontinued by 1940, to measure the influence of past disturbance on modern vegetation. We combined historic maps of cultivated and non-cultivated land with an extensive vegetation survey, historic aerial photographs, and satellite measurements of vegetation response to precipitation variability to examine the importance of land-use history in determining the sensitivity of vegetation to annual variations in precipitation. Remote sensing analysis showed that total plant cover on previously cultivated lands was lower and fluctuations in cover were marginally more dependent on precipitation compared with plant cover on non-cultivated lands. We then compared modern plant assemblages within cultivated and non-cultivated land to determine if compositional differences could explain the current patterns of vegetation cover. We found lower species richness on previously cultivated parcels, and higher frequency and cover of perennial grasses on non-cultivated lands. Therefore, we showed differences in land-cover patterns, isolated a mechanism that could account for the differences (species differences), and developed a method for remotely analyzing land regions that have experienced historic anthropogenic disturbance.

Keywords

land-use legacy Great Basin Owens Valley precipitation variability historic cultivation remote sensing linear spectral mixture analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Lynn Carlson for critical GIS help and expertise; Letty Brown, Jerry Zatorski and Virali Gokaldas for interpreting and digitizing the historic land use maps; Sara Cavin for help with Table 2; and the Inyo County Water Department and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power for providing critical data and expertise. We also thank Christine Goodale and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on the manuscript. Funding is gratefully acknowledged from NASA’s Land-use/Land-cover change program (#NAG5-11145) and the NASA Terrestrial Hydrology Program (#NNG05GB59G). Andrew Elmore was also supported by a Henry Luce Foundation fellowship awarded through Dartmouth College, Environmental Studies Program.

References

  1. Adams JB, Smith MO, Johnson PE. 1986. Spectral mixture modeling: a new analysis of rock and soil types at the Viking Lander I Site. J Geophys Res 91:8098–112Google Scholar
  2. Allen JB, Knight DH. 1984. The effects of introduced annuals on secondary succession in sagebrush-grassland, Wyoming. Southwest. Naturalist 29:407–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asner GP, Elmore AJ, Olander LP, Martin R, Harris AT. 2004. Grazing systems, ecosystem interactions, and global change. Annu Rev Environ Resour 29:11.11–11.39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bekker RM, Verweij GL, Smith REN, Reine R, Bakker JP, Schneider S. 1997. Soil seed banks in European grasslands: does land use affect regeneration perspectives? J Appl Ecol 34:1293–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belnap J. 1995. Surface disturbances: their role in accelerating desertification. Environ Monit Assess 37:39–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Belnap J, Gillette DA. 1998. Vulnerability of desert biological soil crusts to wind erosion: the influences of crust development, soil texture, and disturbance. J Arid Environ 39:133–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bonham CD. 1989. Measurements for terrestrial vegetation. New York: WileyGoogle Scholar
  8. Bossuyt B, Hermy M. 2001. Influence of land use history on seed banks in European temperate forest ecosystems: a review. Ecography 24:225–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bradley BA, Mustard JF. 2005. Identifying land cover variability distinct from land cover change: Cheatgrass in the Great Basin. Remote Sens Environ 94:204–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bremer DJ, Auen LM, Ham JM, Owensby CE. 2001. Evapotranspiration in a prairie ecosystem: effects of grazing by cattle. Agron J 93:338–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carpenter DE, Barbour MG, Bahre CJ. 1986. Old field succession in Mojave Desert scrub. Madrono 33:111–22Google Scholar
  12. D’Antonio CM, Vitousek PM. 1992. Biological invasions by exotic grasses, the grass/fire cycle, and global change. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 23:63–87Google Scholar
  13. Dale VH. 1997. The relationship between land-use change and climate change. Ecol Appl 7:753–69Google Scholar
  14. Donovan LA, Ehleringer JR. 1994. Water stress and use of summer precipitation in a Great Basin shrub community. Funct Ecol 8:289–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elmore AJ, Mustard JF, Manning SJ, Lobell DB. 2000. Quantifying vegetation change in semiarid environments: precision and accuracy of spectral mixture analysis and the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index. Remote Sens Environ 73:87–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Elmore AJ, Mustard JF, Manning SJ. 2003. Regional patterns of plant community response to changes in water: Owens Valley, California. Ecol Appl 13:433–60Google Scholar
  17. Evans RD, Belnap J. 1999. Long-term consequenses of Disturbance on Nitrogen dynamics in an arid ecosystem. Ecology 80:150–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fairbanks DH, Kshatriya KM, van Jaarsveld AS, Underhill LG. 2002. Scales and consequences of human land transformation on South African avian divesity and structure. Anim Conserv 5:61–74Google Scholar
  19. Flanagon LB, Ehleringer JR, Marshall JD. 1992. Differential uptake of summer precipitation among cooccurring trees and shrubs in a pinyon-Juniper woodland. Plant Cell Environ 15:831–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Foster DR, Clayden S, Orwig DA, Hall B. 2002. Oak, chestnut and fire: climatic and cultural controls of long- term forest dynamics in New England, USA. J Biogeogr 29:1359–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Foster D, Swanson F, Aber J, Burke I, Brokaw N, Tilman D, Knapp A. 2003. The importance of land-use legacies to ecology and conservation. BioScience 53:77–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Graumlich LJ. 1993. A 1000-year record of temperature and precipitation in the Sierra Nevada. Quat Res 39:249–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Heady HF, Gibbens RP, Powell RW. 1959. A comparison of the charting, line intercept, and line-point methods of sampling shrub types of vegetation. J Range Manage 12:180–8Google Scholar
  24. Hickman JC, Ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: higher plants of California. Berkeley: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  25. Hollett KJ, Danskin WR, McCaffrey WF, Walti CL. 1991. Geology and water resources of Owens Valley, California. Water Supply Paper 2370-H, U. S. Geological Survey, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  26. Hooper DU, Vitousek PM. 1997. The effects of plant composition and diversity on ecosystem processes. Science 277:1302–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Inyo CoLAaCo. 1990. Technical Appendix F: green book for the long-term groundwater management plan for the Owens Valley and Inyo County. In: Draft EIR: water from the Owens Valley to supply the second Los Angeles Aqueduct: 1970 to 1990, and 1990 onward, pursuant to a long term groundwater management plan. State Clearing House no. 89080705, Department of Water and Power, City of Los Angeles, California, USAGoogle Scholar
  28. Johnson KH, Vogt KA, Clark HJ, Schmitz OJ, Vogt DJ. 1996. Biodiversity and the productivity and stability of ecosystems. Trends in Ecol Evol 11:372–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kennedy TB, Merenlender AM, Vinyard GL. 2000. A comparison of riparian condition and aquatic invertebrate community indices in central Nevada. West N Am Nat 60:255–72Google Scholar
  30. Knapp PA. 1992a. Secondary plant succession and vegetation recovery in two westrn great basin desert ghost towns. Biol Conserv 60:81–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Knapp PA. 1992b. Soil loosening processes following the abandonment of 2 arid western Nevada townsites. Great Basin Nat 52:149–54Google Scholar
  32. Lawton HW, Wilke PJ, Dedecker M, Mason WM. 1979. Agriculture among the paiute of Owens Valley. J Calif Anthropol 3:13–50Google Scholar
  33. Loreau M, Naeem S, Inchausti P, Bensgtsson J, Grime JP, Hector A, Hooper DU, Huston MA, Raffaelli D, Schmid B, Tilman D, Wardle DA. 2001. Ecology – biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: current knowledge and future challenges. Science 294:804–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lovich JE, Bainbridge D. 1999. Anthropogenic degradation of the southern California desert ecosysem and prospects for natural recovery and restoration. Environ Manage 24:309–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mack MC, D’Antonio CM. 1998. Impacts of biological invasions on disturbance regimes. Trends Ecol Evol 13:195–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mustard JF, Pieters CM. 1987. Abundance and distribution of ultramafic microbreccia in Moses Rock Dike: quantitative application of mapping spectrometer data. J Geophys Res 92:13619–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mustard JF, Defries RS, Fisher T, Moran E. 2005. Land use and land cover change pathways and impacts. In: Gutman G, Janetos AC, Justice CO, Moran EF, Mustard JF, Rindfuss RR, Skole D, Turner BL, Cochran MA, Eds. Land Change Science: Observing, Monitoring, and Understanding Trajectories of Change on the Earth’s Surface. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. PP 441–429Google Scholar
  38. Oesterheld M, Loreti J, Semmartin M, Sala OE. 2001. Inter-annual variation in primary production of a semi-arid grassland related to previous-year production. J Veg Sci 12:137–42Google Scholar
  39. Okin GS, Gillette DA. 2001. Distribution of vegetation in wind-dominated landscapes: Implications for wind erosion modeling and landscape processes. J Geophys Res 106:9673–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Okin GS, Murray B, Schlesinger WH. 2001. Degradation of sandy arid shrubland environments: observations, process modelling, and management implications. J Arid Environ 47:123–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Patten DT. 1998. Riparian ecosystems of semi-arid North America: diversity and human impacts. Wetlands 18:498–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Prose DV, Metzger SK, Wilshire HG. 1987. Effects of substrate disturbance on secondary plant succession: Mojave Desert, California. J Appl Ecol 24:305–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Richter BS, Tiller RL, Stutz JC. 2002. Assessment of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal propagules and colonization from abandoned agricultural fields and semi-arid grasslands in riparian floodplains. Appl Soil Ecol 20:227–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sauder RA. 1994. The Lost Frontier: Water Diversion in the Growth and Destruction of Owens Valley Agriculture. Tucson & London: The University of Arizona PressGoogle Scholar
  45. Schlesinger WH, Reynolds JF, Cunningham GL, Huenneke LF, Jarrell WM, Virginia RA, Whitford WG. 1990. Biological feedbacks in global desertification. Science 247:1043–8CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Schulze ED, Mooney HA, Sala OE, Jobbagy E, Buchmann N, Bauer G, Canadell J, Jackson RB, Loreti J, Oesterheld M, Ehleringer JR. 1996. Rooting depth, water availability, and vegetation cover along an aridity gradient in Patagonia. Oecologia 108:503–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Smith MO, Ustin SL, Adams JB, Gillespie AR. 1990a. Vegetation in deserts: I. Regional measure of abundance from multispectral images. Remote Sens Environ 31:1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Smith MO, Ustin SL, Adams JB, Gillespie AR. 1990b. Vegetation in Deserts: II. Environmental influences on regional abundance. Remote Sens Environ 29:27–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Steward J. 1930. Irrigation without agriculture. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science. Arts Lett 12:149–56Google Scholar
  50. Steward J. 1933. Ethnography of the Owens Valley Paiute. Berkely: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  51. Stylinski CD, Allen EB. 1999. Lack of native species recovery following severe exotic disturbance in southern californian shrublands. J Appl Ecol 36:544–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tilman D. 1997. Community invasibility, recruitment limitation, and grassland biodiversity. Ecology 78:81–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tilman D, Wedin D, Knops J. 1996. Productivity and sustainability influenced by biodiversity in grassland ecosystems. Nature 379:718–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Vitousek PM, D’Antonio CM, Loope LL, Westbrooks R. 1996. Biological invasions as global environmental change. Am Sci 84:468–78Google Scholar
  55. Vitousek PM, Mooney HA, Lubchenco J, Melillo JM. 1997. Human domination of Earth’s ecosystems. Science 277:494–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Weaver T, Gustafson D, Lichthardt J. 2001. Exotic plants in early and late seral vegetation of fifteen northern Rocky Mountain environments (HTs). West N Am Nat 61:417–27Google Scholar
  57. Webb RH, Steiger JW, Newman EB. 1988. The response of vegetation to disturbance in Death Valley National Monument, California. 1793, US Geological Survey Bull., Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  58. Young JA, Longland WS. 1996. Impact of alien plants on Great Basin rangelands. Weed Technol 10:384–91Google Scholar
  59. Young J, Evans RA, Major J. 1972. Alien plants in the Great Basin. J Range Manage 25:194–201Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew J. Elmore
    • 1
    • 4
    Email author
  • John F. Mustard
    • 1
  • Steven P. Hamburg
    • 2
  • Sara J. Manning
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Geological ScienceBrown UniversityProvidenceUSA
  2. 2.Center for Environmental StudiesBrown UniversityProvidenceUSA
  3. 3.Inyo County Water DepartmentBishopUSA
  4. 4.Environmental Studies ProgramDartmouth CollegeHanoverUSA

Personalised recommendations