Mounding alters environmental filters that drive plant community development in a novel grassland

Ecological Engineering

Volumn 37, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 1932-1936

  Hough Snee, Nate ^a   Long, A Lexine ^a,b   Jeroue, Lacey ^a   Ewing, Kern ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b King County Noxious Weeds Program   (United States)

Author keywords

Assembly rules; Grasslands; Indicator species; Landfill retirement; Microtopography; Novel ecosystems

Indexed keywords

ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION; ENVIRONMENTAL HETEROGENEITY; ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES; GRASSLANDS; INDICATOR SPECIES; LONG-TERM EFFECTS; MICRO TOPOGRAPHY; MICROSITES; NON-METRIC MULTIDIMENSIONAL SCALING; NOVEL ECOSYSTEMS; PERMANOVA; PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENTS; PLANT COMMUNITIES; RESTORATION PROJECT; SOIL RESOURCES; SPACE-BASED;

FORESTRY; MOISTURE DETERMINATION; RESTORATION; SOIL MOISTURE;

ECOSYSTEMS;

ASSEMBLY RULE; BIOINDICATOR; COMMUNITY COMPOSITION; ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS; ENVIRONMENTAL DISTURBANCE; ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION; GRASSLAND; HEIGHT; HETEROGENEITY; LANDFILL; MICROCLIMATE; MICROTOPOGRAPHY; ORDINATION; PLANT COMMUNITY; RESTORATION ECOLOGY; SOIL MOISTURE; VARIANCE ANALYSIS; VEGETATION STRUCTURE; WETLAND;

EID: 80052090610     PISSN: 09258574     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2011.06.013     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Anderson M.J. A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Aust. Ecol. 2001, 26:32-46.
2. Anderson M.J., ter Braak C.J.F. Permutation tests for multi-factorial analysis of variance. J. Stat. Comput. Simul. 2003, 73:85-113.
3. Anderson H.M., Gale M.R., Jurgensen M.F., Trettin C.C. Vascular and non-vascular plant community response to silvicultural practices and resultant microtopography creation in a forested wetland. Wetlands 2007, 27:68-79.
4. Bakker J.D. Increasing the utility of indicator species analysis. J. Appl. Ecol. 2008, 45:1829-1835.
5. Biederman L.A., Whisenant S.G. Using mounds to create microtopography alters plant community development early in restoration. Restor. Ecol. 2011, 19:53-61.
6. Bruland G.L., Richardson C.J. Hydrologic, edaphic, and vegetative responses to microtopographic reestablishment in a restored wetland. Restor. Ecol. 2005, 13:515-523.
7. Conrad M.K., Tischew S. Grassland restoration in practice: do we achieve the targets? a case study from Saxony-Anhlat/Germany. Ecol. Eng. 2011, 37:1149-1157.
8. Dufrene M., Legendre P. Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecol. Monogr. 1997, 67:345-366.
9. Ewing K. Mounding as a technique for restoration of prairie on a capped landfill in the Puget Sound lowlands. Restor. Ecol. 2002, 10:289-296.
10. Ewing K. Effects of initial site treatments on early growth and three-year survival of Idaho fescue. Restor. Ecol. 2002, 10:282-288.
11. Hough-Snee N., Bakker J.D., Ewing K. Long-term effects of initial site treatment on fescue in a novel prairie ecosystem (Washington). Ecol. Restor. 2011, 29:14-17.
12. Isselin-Nondedeu F., Bédécarrats A. Soil microtopographies shaped by plants and cattle facilitate seed bank formation on alpine ski trails. Ecol. Eng. 2007, 30:278-285.
13. Jochimsen M.E. Vegetation development and species assemblages in a long-term reclamation project on mine spoil. Ecol. Eng. 2001, 17:187-198.
14. Karim M.N., Mallik A.U. Roadside revegetation by native plants I. Roadside microhabitats, floristic zonation and species traits. Ecol. Eng. 2008, 32:222-237.
15. McCune B., Grace J.B. Analysis of Ecological Communities 2002, MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, OR.
16. Moser K., Ahn C., Noe G. Characterization of microtopography and its influence on vegetation patterns in created wetlands. Wetlands 2007, 27:1081-1097.
17. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), NRCS. 2010. The PLANTS Database. National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490, USA. http://plants.usda.gov/.
18. Oehlert, G. W., 2000. A first course in design and analysis of experiments. WH Freeman, New York, New York, USA. 600 p.
19. Olson, P., Stockdale, E., 2010. Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark on Streams in Washington State. Second Review Draft. Washington State Department of Ecology, Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program, Lacey, WA. Ecology Publication # 08-06-001.
20. R Development Core Team R: A language and environment for statistical computing 2010, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, http://www.R-project.org.
21. Rossell I.M., Moorhead K.K., Alvarado H., Warren R.J. Succession of a southern Appalachian mountain wetland six years following hydrologic and microtopographic restoration. Restor. Ecol. 2009, 17:205-214.
22. Rudgren K., Halvorsen R., Odland A., Skjerdal G. Restoration of Alpine spoil heaps: successional rates predict vegetation recovery in 50 years. Ecol. Eng. 2011, 37:294-301.
23. Schaeffer V. Alien invasions, ecological restoration in cities and the loss of ecological memory. Restor. Ecol. 2009, 17:171-176.
24. Simmons M.E., Ben Wu X., Whisenant S.G. Plant and soil responses to created microtopography and soil treatments in bottomland hardwood forest restoration. Restor. Ecol. 2011, 19:136-146.
25. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1996. National list of vascular plant species that occur in wetlands: 1996 national summary-indicator by region and subregion. http://library.fws.gov/Pubs9/wetlands_plantlist96.pdf.
26. Vivian-Smith G. Microtopographic heterogeneity and floristic diversity in experimental wetland communities. J. Ecol. 1997, 85:71-82.
27. Werner K.J., Zedler J.B. How sedge meadow soils, microtopography, and vegetation respond to sedimentation. Wetlands 2002, 22:451-466.
28. Whisenant S.G. Restoring Degraded Wildlands: A Process-Orientated Approach 1998, Cambridge University Press.
29. Zedler J.B. Restoring wetland plant diversity: a comparison of existing and adaptive approaches. Wetl. Ecol. Manag. 2005, 13:5-14.