Nitrogen enhances the competitive ability of cheatgrass (bromus tectotum) relative to native grasses

Invasive Plant Science and Management

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 287-295

  Vasquez, Edward ^a   Sheley, Roger ^a   Svejcar, Tony ^a  

^a AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cheatgrass; Competition; Interference; Invasive plants; Plant available nitrogen

Indexed keywords

BROMUS; BROMUS TECTORUM; POACEAE;

EID: 70350180409     PISSN: 19397291     EISSN: 1939747X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1614/IPSM-08-062.1     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Arredondo, J. T., T. A. Jones, and D. A. Johnson. 1998. Seedling growth of intermountain perennial and weedy annual grasses. J. Range Manage. 51:584-589.
2. Belnap, J., S. L. Phillips, S. K. Sherrod, and A. Moldenke. 2005. Soil biota can change after exotic plant invasion: does this effect ecosystem processes? Ecology 86:3007-3017.
3. Berendse, F. and W. T. Elberse. 1990. Competition and nutrient availability in heathland and grassland ecosystems. Pages 93-116 in J. B. Grace and D. Tilman, eds. Perspectives on Plant Competition. Caldwell, NJ: Blackburn.
4. Bradley, B. A. and J. F. Mustard. 2006. Characterizing the landscape dynamics of an invasive plant and risk of invasion using remote sensing. Ecol. Appl. 16:1132-1147.
5. Bidwell, S., P. M. Attiwill, and M. A. Adams. 2006. Nitrogen availability and weed invasion in a remnant native woodland in urban Melbourne. Austral. Ecol. 3:262-270.
6. Blumenthal, D. 2006. Interactions between resource availability and enemy release in plant invasion. Ecol. Lett. 9:887-895
7. Casals, P., J. Romanya, J. Cortina, J. Fons, M. Bode, and V. R. Vellejo. 1995. Nitrogen supply rate in Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) forest of contrasting slope aspect. Plant Soil 168-169:67-73.
8. Casper, B. B. and R. B. Jackson. 1997. Plant competition underground. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 28:545-570.
9. Chambers, J. C., B. A. Roundy, R. R. Blank, S. E. Meyer, and A. Whittaker. 2007. What makes Great Basin sagebrush ecosystems invasible by Bromus tectorunii Ecol. Monogr. 77:117-145.
10. Crain, J. M. 2006. Competition for nutrients and optimal root allocation. Plant Soil 285:171-185.
11. Daehler, C. C. 2003. Performance comparisons of co-occurring native and alien invasive plants: implications for conservation and restoration. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 34:183-211.
12. D'Antonio, C. M. and P. M. Vitousek. 1992. Biological invasions by exotic grasses, the grass/fire cycles, and global change. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 23:63-87.
13. Drohan, P. J., D. J. Merkler, and B. J. Buck. 2005. Suitability of the plant root simulator probe for use in the Mojave Desert. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 69:1482-1491.
14. Duncan, C. A., J. J. Jachetta, M. L. Brown, V. F. Carrithers, J. K. Clark, J. M. Ditomaso, R. G. Lym, K. C. McDaniel, M. J. Renz, and P. M. Rice. 2004. Assessing the economic, environmental, and societal losses from invasive plants on rangeland and wildlands. Weed Technol. 18:1411-1416.
15. Ehrenfeld, J. G. 2003. Effects of exotic plant invasions on soil nutrient cycling processes. Ecosystems 6:503-523.
16. Fowler, N. 1986. The role of competition in plant communities in arid and semiarid regions. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 17:89-110.
17. Goldberg, D. E. and A. M. Barton. 1992. Patterns and consequences of interspecific competition in natural communities: a review of field experiments with plants. Am. Nat. 139:771-801.
18. Grime, J. P. 2007. Plant strategy theories: a comment on Crain (2005). J. Ecol. 95:227-230.
19. Hangs, R. D., K. J. Greer, and C. A. Sulewski. 2004. The effect of interspecific competition on conifer seedling growth and nitrogen availability measured using ion-exchange membranes. Can. J. For. Res. 34:754-761.
20. Harpole, W. S. 2006. Resource-ratio theory and the control of invasive plants. Plant Soil 280:23-27.
21. Harrison, S., B. D. Inouye, and H. D. Safford. 2003. Ecological heterogeneity in the effects of grazing and fire on grassland diversity. Conserv. Biol. 17:837-845.
22. Herron, G. J., R. L. Sheley, B. D. Maxwell, and J. S. Jacobsen. 2001. Influence of nutrient availability on the interaction between spotted knapweed and bluebunch wheatgrass. Restor. Ecol. 9:326-331.
23. James, J. J. and R. E. Drenovsky. 2007. A basis for relative growth rate differences between native and invasive forb seedlings. J. Range Manage. 60:395-00.
24. James, J. J. and J. H. Richards. 2007. Influence of temporal heterogeneity in nitrogen supply on competitive interactions in a desert shrub community. Oecologia 152:721-727.
25. Johnson, D. W., R. F. Walker, and J. T. Ball. 1995. Lessons from lysimeters: soil N release from disturbance compromises controlled environment study. Ecol. Appl. 5:395-400.
26. Kahmen, A., C. Renker, S. B. Unsicker, and N. Buckman. 2006. Niche complementary for nitrogen: an explanation for the biodiversity and ecosystem functioning relationship? Ecology 87:1244-1255.
27. Knapp, P. A. 1996. Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L) dominance in the Great Basin Desert. Global Environ. Change 6:37-52.
28. Krueger-Mangold, J. M., R. L. Sheley, and T. J. Svejcar. 2006. Toward ecologically-based invasive plant management on rangeland. Weed Sci. 54:597-605.
29. Lowe, P. N., W. K. Lauenroth, and I. C. Burke. 2003. Effects of nitrogen availability on competition between Bromus tectorum and Bouteloua gracilis. Plant Ecol. 167:247-254.
30. Mack, R. N. 1981. Invasions of Bromus tectorum L. into western North America: an ecological chronicle. Agro-Ecosystems 7:145-165.
31. McLendon, T. and E. F. Redente. 1992. Effects of nitrogen limitation on species replacement dynamics during early secondary succession on a semiarid sagebrush site. Oecologia 91:312-317.
32. Monaco, T. A., D. A. Johnson, J. M. Norton, T. A. Jones, K. J. Connors, J. B. Norton, and M. B. Redinbaugh. 2003. Contrasting responses of intermountain west grasses to soil nitrogen. J. Range Manage. 56:282-290.
33. Pimentel, D., L. Lach, R. Zuniga, and D. Morrison. 2005. Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States. Ecol. Econ. 52:273-288. (Pubitemid 40307254)
34. Pyke, D. A., T. O. McArthur, K. S. Harrison, and M. Pellant. 2003. Coordinated intermountain restoration project-fire, decomposition and restoration. Pages 1116-1124 in Proceedings of the VII International Rangelands Congress. Durban, South Africa: Publisher.
35. Radosevich, S. R. 1987. Methods to study interactions among crops and weeds. Weed Technol. 1:190-198.
36. Radosevich, S., J. Holt, and C. Ghersa. 1997. Weed Ecology: Implications for Management. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
37. Radosevich, S., J. Holt, and C. Ghersa. 2007. Ecology of Weeds and Invasive Plants. 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
38. Redente, E. F., J. E. Friedlander, and T. McLendon. 1992. Response of early and late seral species to nitrogen and phosphorus gradients. Plant Soil 140:127-135.
39. SAS. 2002. SAS/STAT User's Guide. Version 9.1. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
40. Sheley, R. L. and L. L. Larson. 1995. Interference between cheatgrass and yellow starthistle at 3 soil depths. J. Range Manage. 48:392-397.
41. Silvertown, J. 2004. Plants coexistence and niche. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19: 605-611.
42. Snedecor, R. L. and W. G. Cochran. 1980. Statistical Methods. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
43. Spitters, C. J. T. 1983. An alternative approach to the analysis of mixed cropping experiments. 1. Estimation of competition effects. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 31:1-11.
44. Tilman, D. 2007. Resource competition and plant traits: a response to Craine et al. 2005. J. Ecol. 95:231-234.
45. Weldon, C. W. and W. L. Slauson. 1986. The intensity of competition versus its importance: an overlooked distinction and some implications. Q. Rev. Biol. 61:23-24.
46. Westbrooks, R. 1998. Invasive Plants, Changing the Landscape of America: Fact Book. Washington, DC: Federal Interagency Committee for the Management of Noxious and Exotic Weeds. 109 p.
47. Young, J. A. and F. L. Allen. 1997. Cheatgrass and range science: 1930-1950. J. Range Manage. 50:530-535.
48. Young, K. and J. Mangold. 2008. Medusahead {Taeniatherum caput-medusae) outperforms squirreltail (Elymus elymoides) through interference and growth rate. Invasive Plant Sci. Manage. 1:73-81.