Advertisement

Biological Invasions

, Volume 20, Issue 6, pp 1493–1506 | Cite as

Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) distribution in the intermountain Western United States and its relationship to fire frequency, seasonality, and ignitions

  • Bethany A. Bradley
  • Caroline A. Curtis
  • Emily J. Fusco
  • John T. Abatzoglou
  • Jennifer K. Balch
  • Sepideh Dadashi
  • Mao-Ning Tuanmu
Original Paper

Abstract

Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) is an invasive grass pervasive across the Intermountain Western US and linked to major increases in fire frequency. Despite widespread ecological impacts associated with cheatgrass, we lack a spatially extensive model of cheatgrass invasion in the Intermountain West. Here, we leverage satellite phenology predictors and thousands of field surveys of cheatgrass abundance to create regional models of cheatgrass distribution and percent cover. We compare cheatgrass presence to fire probability, fire seasonality and ignition source. Regional models of percent cover had low predictive power (34% of variance explained), but distribution models based on a threshold of 15% cover to differentiate high abundance from low abundance had an overall accuracy of 74%. Cheatgrass achieves ≥ 15% cover over 210,000 km2 (31%) of the Intermountain West. These lands were twice as likely to burn as those with low abundance, and four times more likely to burn multiple times between 2000 and 2015. Fire probability increased rapidly at low cheatgrass cover (1–5%) but remained similar at higher cover, suggesting that even small amounts of cheatgrass in an ecosystem can increase fire risk. Abundant cheatgrass was also associated with a 10 days earlier fire seasonality and interacted strongly with anthropogenic ignitions. Fire in cheatgrass was particularly associated with human activity, suggesting that increased awareness of fire danger in invaded areas could reduce risk. This study suggests that cheatgrass is much more spatially extensive and abundant than previously documented and that invasion greatly increases fire frequency, even at low percent cover.

Keywords

Bromus tectorum Fire regime alteration Grass-fire cycle Invasive grass Invasive plant Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) burned area product 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank E. Fleishman, J. Finn, N. Horning, A. Mahood, N. Mietkiewicz, and R.C. Nagy for valuable discussion. E. Fleishman, S. Hanser, M. Holton, M. Jesus, M. Lavin, A. Mahood, B. Rau, and L. Turner greatly assisted this project by providing percent cover data. This research was supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Terrestrial Ecology Program under Award NNX14AJ14G and the Joint Fire Sciences Program 15-2-03-6.

Supplementary material

10530_2017_1641_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (120 kb)
Histograms of predicted percent cover for different bins of observed percent cover and contingency table calculator for different mapped percent cover thresholds

References

  1. Allen JM, Bradley BA (2016) Out of the weeds? Reduced plant invasion risk with climate change in the continental United States. Biol Conserv 203:306–312.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.09.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balch JK, Bradley BA, D’Antonio CM, Gómez-Dans J (2013) Introduced annual grass increases regional fire activity across the arid western USA (1980–2009). Global Change Biol 19:173–183.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12046 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balch JK, Bradley BA, Abatzoglou JT, Nagy RC, Fusco EJ, Mahood AL (2017) Human-started wildfires expand the fire niche across the United States. Proc Natl Acad Sci 114:2946–2951.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1617394114 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Bargeron C, Moorhead D (2007) EDDMapS—early detection and distribution mapping system for the southeast exotic pest plant council. Wildland Weeds 10:4–8Google Scholar
  5. BLM AIM (2016) Bureau of land management: assessment, inventory, and monitoring. http://aim.landscapetoolbox.org/. Accessed Nov 2016
  6. Boyte SP, Wylie BK, Major DJ, Brown JF (2015) The integration of geophysical and enhanced Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer Normalized Difference Vegetation Index data into a rule-based, piecewise regression-tree model to estimate cheatgrass beginning of spring growth. Int J Digit Earth 8:118–132.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2013.860196 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyte SP, Wylie BK, Major DJ (2016) Cheatgrass percent cover change: comparing recent estimates to climate change-driven predictions in the Northern Great Basin. Rangel Ecol Manag 69:265–279.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2016.03.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bradley BA (2013) Distribution models of invasive plants over-estimate potential impact. Biol Invasions 15(7):1417–1429.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-012-0380-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bradley BA (2014) Remote detection of invasive plants: a review of spectral, textural and phenological approaches. Biol Invasions 16:1411–1425.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-013-0578-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bradley BA, Mustard JF (2005) Identifying land cover variability distinct from land cover change: cheatgrass in the Great Basin. Remote Sens Environ 94:204–213.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2004.08.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bradley BA, Mustard JF (2006) Characterizing the landscape dynamics of an invasive plant and risk of invasion using remote sensing. Ecol Appl 16:1132–1147. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[1132:CTLDOA]2.0.CO;2CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Bradley BA, Mustard JF (2008) Comparison of phenology trends by land cover class: a case study in the Great Basin, USA. Global Change Biol 14:334–346.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01479.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45:5–32.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brooks ML, Pyke DA (2001) Invasive plants and fire in the deserts of North America. In: The first national congress on fire ecology, prevention, and management, San Diego, Tall Timbers Research Station, TallahasseeGoogle Scholar
  15. Brummer TJ, Taylor KT, Rotella J, Maxwell BD, Rew LJ, Lavin M (2016) Drivers of Bromus tectorum abundance in the Western North American sagebrush steppe. Ecosystems 19:986–1000.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-016-9980-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Carroll M, DiMiceli C, Sohlberg R, Townshend J (2004) 250 m MODIS normalized difference vegetation index, 250ndvi28920033435, collection 4. University of Maryland, College Park. Accessed July 2016Google Scholar
  17. Clinton NE, Potter C, Crabtree B, Genovese V, Gross P, Gong P (2010) Remote sensing-based time-series analysis of cheatgrass (L.) phenology. J Environ Qual 39:955–963.  https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2009.0158 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Cohen J (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 20:37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Crawford JA, Olson RA, West NE, Mosley JC, Schroeder MA, Whitson TD, Miller RF, Gregg MA, Boyd CS (2004) Ecology and management of sage-grouse and sage-grouse habitat. J Range Manag 57:2–19. https://doi.org/10.2111/1551-5028(2004)057[0002:EAMOSA]2.0.CO;2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cross T, Finn JT, Bradley BA (2017) Frequency of invasive plant occurrence is not a suitable proxy for abundance in the Northeast United States. Ecosphere.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1800 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. D’Antonio C, Vitousek P (1992) Biological invasions by exotic grasses, the grass/fire cycle, and global change. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 23:63–87.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.23.110192.000431 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dadashi S, Balch J, Bradley BA (2017) Annual fire event maps for the U.S. (2001–2016) based on the MODIS burned area product (MCD64A1 Collection 5.1). Open Science Framework, 4 Sept 2017 (web)Google Scholar
  23. Davies GM, Bakker JD, Dettweiler-Robinson E, Dunwiddie PW, Hall SA, Downs J, Evans J (2012) Trajectories of change in sagebrush steppe vegetation communities in relation to multiple wildfires. Ecol Appl 22:1562–1577.  https://doi.org/10.1890/10-2089.1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. DiMiceli C, Carroll M, Sohlberg R, Huang C, Hansen M, Townshend J (2011) Annual global automated MODIS vegetation continuous fields (MOD44B) at 250 m spatial resolution for data years beginning day 65, 2000–2010, collection 5 percent tree cover. University of Maryland, College ParkGoogle Scholar
  25. Downs J, Larson K, Cullinan V (2016) Mapping cheatgrass across the range of the greater sage-grouse. Pacific Northwest National Lab Report PNNL-22517Google Scholar
  26. Eidenshink J, Schwind B, Brewer K, Zhu ZL, Quayle B, Howard S (2007) Project for monitoring trends in burn severity. Fire Ecol 3(1):3–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Elmore AJ, Mustard JF, Manning SJ (2003) Regional patterns of plant community response to changes in water: Owens Valley, California. Ecol Appl 13(2):443–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fleishman E (2015a) Vegetation structure and composition in the Wasskuk Range, Sweetwater Mountains, and east slope of the Sierra Nevada, Nevada and California. Forest Service Research Data Archive, Fort Collins.  https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2015-0032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fleishman E (2015b) Vegetation structure and composition in the Shoshone Mountains and Toiyabe, Toquima and Monitor ranges, Nevada, 2nd edn. Forest Service Research Data Archive, Fort Collins.  https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2013-0007-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Freeman ED, Sharp TR, Larsen RT, Knight RN, Slater SJ, McMillan BR (2014) Negative effects of an exotic grass invasion on small-mammal communities. PLoS ONE 9:e108843.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0108843 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Fusco EJ, Abatzoglou JT, Balch JK, Finn JT, Bradley BA (2016) Quantifying the human influence on fire ignition across the western USA. Ecol Appl 26:2390–2401.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1395 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gelbard JL, Belnap J (2003) Roads as conduits for exotic plant invasions in a semiarid landscape. Conserv Biol 17:420–432.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.01408.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Giglio L, Randerson JT, van der Werf GR (2013) Analysis of daily, monthly, and annual burned area using the fourth-generation global fire emissions database (GFED4). J Geophys Res Biogeosci 118:317–328.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrg.20042 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. GMTED (2010) Global multi-resolution terrain elevation data 2010. https://lta.cr.usgs.gov/GMTED2010. Accessed Dec 2016
  35. Hanser SE (2011) Northwest ReGAP and Oregon SageMap validation survey plots, 2002–2006 (unpublished datasets)Google Scholar
  36. Holbrook JD, Arkle RS, Rachlow JL, Vierling KT, Pilliod DS, Wiest MM (2016) Occupancy and abundance of predator and prey: implications of the fire-cheatgrass cycle in sagebrush ecosystems. Ecosphere.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1307 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hull AC, Pechanec JF (1947) Cheatgrass—a challenge to range research. J For 45(8):555–564Google Scholar
  38. Knapp PA (1996) Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L) dominance in the Great Basin Desert. Global Environ Change 6:37–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-3780(95)00112-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Knutson KC, Pyke DA, Wirth TA, Arkle RS, Pilliod DS, Brooks ML, Chambers JC, Grace JB (2014) Long-term effects of seeding after wildfire on vegetation in Great Basin shrubland ecosystems. J Appl Ecol 51:1414–1424.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12309 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Lockyer ZB, Coates PS, Casazza ML, Espinosa S, Delehanty DJ (2015) Nest-site selection and reproductive success of greater sage-grouse in a fire-affected habitat of northwestern Nevada. J Wildl Manag 79:785–797.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.899 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mack RN (1981) Invasion of Bromus tectorum L. into Western North America: an ecological chronicle. Agro Ecosyst 7:145–165.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3746(81)90027-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McIver J, Brunson M, Bunting S, Chambers J, Doescher P, Grace J, Hulet A, Johnson D, Knick S, Miller R, Pellant M, Pierson F, Pyke D, Rau B, Rollins K, Roundy B, Schupp E, Tausch R, Williams J (2014) A synopsis of short-term response to alternative restoration treatments in sagebrush-steppe: the SageSTEP project. Rangel Ecol Manag 67:584–598.  https://doi.org/10.2111/REM-D-14-00084.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Parks SA, Miller C, Parisien M-A, Holsinger LM, Dobrowski SZ, Abatzoglou J (2015) Wildland fire deficit and surplus in the western United States, 1984–2012. Ecosphere 6:1–13.  https://doi.org/10.1890/ES15-00294.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pasquarella VJ, Holden CE, Kaufman L, Woodcock CE (2016) From imagery to ecology: leveraging time series of all available Landsat observations to map and monitor ecosystem state and dynamics. Remote Sens Ecol Conserv 2(3):152–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Peterson EB (2005) Estimating cover of an invasive grass (Bromus tectorum) using tobit regression and phenology derived from two dates of Landsat ETM + data. Int J Remote Sens 26:2491–2507.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160500127815 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Peterson EB (2006) A map of invasive annual grasses in Nevada derived from multitemporal Landsat 5 TM imagery. Report for the USDI Bureau of Land Management, Nevada State Office, Reno, Nevada Natural Heritage ProgramGoogle Scholar
  48. Petitpierre B, Kueffer C, Broennimann O, Randin C, Daehler C, Guisan A (2012) Climatic niche shifts are rare among terrestrial plant invaders. Science 335(6074):1344–1348.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1215933 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Pilliod DS, Welty JL, Arkle RS (2017) Refining the cheatgrass–fire cycle in the Great Basin: precipitation timing and fine fuel composition predict wildfire trends. Ecol Evol.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3414 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pyšek P, Richardson DM, Pergl J, Jarošík V, Sixtová Z, Weber E (2008) Geographical and taxonomic biases in invasion ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 23(5):237–244.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2008.02.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Renwick KM, Curtis C, Kleinhesselink AR, Schlaepfer D, Bradley BA, Aldridge CL, Poulter B, Adler PB (2017) Multi‐model comparison highlights consistency in predicted effect of warming on a semi-arid shrub. Global Change Biol.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13900 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rollins M (2009) LANDFIRE: a nationally consistent vegetation, wildland fire, and fuel assessment. Int J Wildland Fire 18:235–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Short KC (2015) Spatial wildfire occurrence data for the United States, 1992–2013 [FPA_FOD_20150323], 3rd edn. Forest Service Research Data Archive, Fort Collins.  https://doi.org/10.2737/RDS-2013-0009.3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Stewart G, Hull AC (1949) Cheatgrass (Bromus Tectorum L.): an ecologic intruder in Southern Idaho. Ecology 30:58–74.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1932277 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Taylor K, Brummer T, Rew LJ, Lavin M, Maxwell BD (2014) Bromus tectorum response to fire varies with climate conditions. Ecosystems 17:960–973.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-014-9771-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Thomas KA, Guertin P (2007) Southwest exotic mapping program 2007: occurrence summary and maps of select invasive, non-native plants in Arizona (USGS Numbered Series No. 2007–1277). Open-File Report, Geological Survey (U.S.)Google Scholar
  57. USGS EROS (2016) eMODIS remote sensing phenology data. https://phenology.cr.usgs.gov/. Accessed Aug 2016
  58. USGS (2017) National hydrography dataset. https://nhd.usgs.gov/
  59. West AM, Evangelista PH, Jarnevich CS, Kumar S, Swallow A, Luizza MW, Chignell SM (2017) Using multi-date satellite imagery to monitor invasive grass species distribution in post-wildfire landscapes: an iterative, adaptable approach that employs open-source data and software. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 59:135–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wolkovich EM, Cleland EE (2011) The phenology of plant invasions: a community ecology perspective. Front Ecol Environ 9:287–294.  https://doi.org/10.1890/100033 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental ConservationUniversity of MassachusettsAmherstUSA
  2. 2.Graduate Program in Organismic and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of MassachusettsAmherstUSA
  3. 3.Department of GeographyUniversity of IdahoMoscowUSA
  4. 4.Earth Lab, CIRESUniversity of ColoradoBoulderUSA
  5. 5.Department of GeographyUniversity of ColoradoBoulderUSA
  6. 6.Biodiversity Research Center, Academia SinicaTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations