Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Does tallgrass prairie restoration enhance the invasion resistance of post-agricultural lands?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biological Invasions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is building interest in the use of ecological restoration to enhance the biotic invasion resistance of disturbed lands. However, few studies have rigorously examined the effect of community restoration on biotic invasion resistance under conditions of controlled invader propagule pressure. Results are presented from a field experiment conducted in a post-agricultural grassland in eastern Kansas to explore the interplay of tallgrass prairie restoration and invader propagule pressure in modulating plant invasion. Seed additions of multiple native and non-native species were used to provide a general test of biotic invasion resistance under varied propagule availability. Restoration increased plant diversity, increased above ground productivity, reduced the availability of light, soil moisture and bare soil microsites and strongly suppressed the invasion of all species sown into the experiment, including the highly invasive exotic legume, Lespedeza cuneata. In the absence of restoration, L. cuneata rapidly dominated plots where it had been sown, particularly at the highest propagule pressure. Results of multiple regression modelling suggested that restoration most likely increased community resistance to L. cuneata invasion through changes in functional guild composition rather than through changes in species diversity. Overall our study indicates that restoration of abandoned agricultural land to native tallgrass prairie can enhance invasion resistance in the face of substantial invader propagule pressures by altering community composition to dominance by native species that are efficient in utilizing resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allred BW, Fuhlendorf SD, Monaco TA, Will RE (2009) Morphological and physiological traits in the success of the invasive plant Lespedeza cuneata. Biol Invasions 12:739–749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker JD, Wilson SD (2004) Using ecological restoration to constrain biological invasion. J Appl Ecol 41:1058–1064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benayas JMR, Newton AC, Diaz A, Bullock JM (2009) Enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem services by ecological restoration: a meta-analysis. Science 325:1121–1124

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenthal DM, Jordan NR, Svenson EL (2005) Effects of prairie restoration on weed invasions. Agric Ecosyst Environ 107:221–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter CT, Ungar IA (2002) Aboveground vegetation, seed bank and soil analysis of a 31-year-old forest restoration on coal mine spoil in southeastern Ohio. Am Midl Nat 147:44–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cleland EE, Larios L, Suding KN (2013) Strengthening invasion filters to reassemble native plant communities: soil resources and phenological overlap. Restor Ecol 21:390–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coykendall KE, Houseman GR (2013) Lespedeza cuneata invasion alters soils facilitating its own growth. Biol Invasions 16:1735–1742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis MA, Grime JP, Thompson K (2000) Fluctuating resources in plant communities: a general theory of invasibility. J Ecol 88:528–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly ED (1954) Some factors that affect palatability in sericea lespedeza, L. cuneata. Agron 46:96–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eddy T, Moore C (1998) Effects of sericea lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata (Dumont) G. Don) invasion on oak savannas in Kansas. Trans Wis Acad Sci 86:57–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Elton CS (1958) The ecology of invasions by animals and plants. Methuen and Co Ltd, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Eschtruth AK, Battles JJ (2009) Assessing the relative importance of disturbance, herbivory, diversity and propagule pressure in exotic plant invasion. Ecol Monogr 79:265–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fargione J, Tilman D (2005) Diversity decreases invasion via both sampling and complementarity effects. Ecol Lett 8:604–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fargione J, Brown CS, Tilman D (2003) Community assembly and invasion: an experimental test of neutral versus niche processes. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100:8916–8920

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Foster BL, Dickson TL (2004) Grassland diversity and productivity: the interplay of resource availability and propagule pools. Ecology 85:1541–1547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster BL, Murphy CA, Keller KR, Aschenbach TA, Questad EJ, Kindscher K (2007) Restoration of prairie community structure and ecosystem function in an abandoned hayfield: a sowing experiment. Restor Ecol 15:652–661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funk JL, Cleland EE, Suding KN, Zavaleta ES (2008) Restoration through reassembly: plant traits and invasion resistance. Trends Ecol Evol 23:695–703

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grime JP (1998) Benefits of plant diversity to ecosystems: immediate, filter and founder effects. J Ecol 86:902–910

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guernsey WJ (1970) Sericea lespedeza: its use and management. Farmers’ Bulletin No. 2245. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs RJ, Harris JA (2001) Restoration ecology: repairing the earth’s ecosystems in the new millennium. Restor Ecol 9:239–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houseman GR, Foster BL, Brassel CE (2014) Propagule pressure-invasibility relationships: testing the influence of soil fertility and disturbance with Lespedeza cuneata. Oecologia 174:511–520

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jog S, Kindscher K, Questad E, Foster B, Loring H (2006) Floristic quality as an indicator of native species diversity in managed grasslands. Nat Areas J 26:149–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalburtji KL, Mosjidis JA, Mamolos AP (2001) Allelopathic plants. Lespedeza cuneata. Allelopathy 8:41–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine JM, D’Antonio C (1999) Elton revisited: a review of evidence linking diversity and invasibility. Oikos 87:15–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lingzi H, Busby RR, Gebhart DL, Yannarell AC (2014) Invasive Lespedeza cuneata and native Lespedeza virginica experience asymmetrical benefits from rhizobial symbionts. Plant Soil 384:315–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longo G, Seidler TG, Garibaldi LA, Tognetti PM, Chaneton EJ (2013) Functional group dominance and identity effects influence the magnitude of grassland invasion. J Ecol 101:1114–1124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lonsdale WM (1999) Global patterns of plant invasions and the concept of invasibility. Ecology 80:1522–1536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oakley CA, Knox JS (2013) Plant species richness increases resistance to invasion by non-resident plant species during grassland restoration. Appl Veg Sci 16:21–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price CA, Weltzin JF (2003) Managing non-native plant populations through intensive community restoration in Cades Cove, Great Smoky Mountains National Park, U.S.A. Restor Ecol 11:351–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schutzenhofer MR, Knight TM (2007) Population-level effects of augmented herbivory on Lespedeza cuneata: implications for biological control. Ecol Appl 17:965–971

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Silliman S, Maccarone AD (2005) Distribution, infestation, and habits of sericea lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata) in Cowley County, Kansas. Trans Kans Acad Sci 108:83–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D (2004) Niche tradeoffs, neutrality, and community structure: a stochastic theory of resource competition, invasion, and community assembly. Proc Natl Acad Sci 101:10854–10861

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D, Wedin D (1991) Plant traits and resource reduction for five grasses growing on a nitrogen gradient. Ecology 72:685–700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turnbull LA, Rahm S, Baudois O, Eichenberger-glinz S, Wacker L, Schmid B (2005) Experimental invasion by legumes reveals non-random assembly rules in grassland communities. J Ecol 93:1062–1070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kleunen M, Weber E, Fischer M (2010) A meta-analysis of trait differences between invasive and non-invasive plant species. Ecol Lett 13:235–245

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Von Holle B, Simberloff D (2005) Ecological resistance to biological invasion overwhelmed by propagule pressure. Ecology 86:3212–3218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wedin D, Tilman D (1990) Species effects on nitrogen cycling: a test with perennial grasses. Oecologia 84:433–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong BM, Houseman GR, Foster BL (2012) Targeting vulnerable life-stages of Sericea Lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata) with prescribed burns. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 5:487–493

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Grant Adams, Tim Dickson, Trisha Mantei and Sam Thompson for assistance in the field. Funding was provided by the National Science Foundation (DEB-1021158 and DEB-0950100).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Kansas Biological Survey, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, 66045-7534, USA

    Bryan L. Foster & David R. Hall

  2. Department of Biological Sciences, Wichita State University, Wichita, KS, 67260-0026, USA

    Gregory R. Houseman

  3. Berkeley Initiative for Global Change Biology, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 94720, USA

    Sarah E. Hinman

Authors
  1. Bryan L. Foster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gregory R. Houseman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David R. Hall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sarah E. Hinman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bryan L. Foster.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 8 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Foster, B.L., Houseman, G.R., Hall, D.R. et al. Does tallgrass prairie restoration enhance the invasion resistance of post-agricultural lands?. Biol Invasions 17, 3579–3590 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-015-0979-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-015-0979-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation