Shupert, Lindsay Anne. 2016. INTEGRATIVE MANAGEMENT OF LESPEDEZA CUNEATA IN PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS. MS Thesis. Southern Illinois University Carbondale.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: <i>Lespedeza cuneata</i> is a perennial invasive legume native to Asia that is common across grasslands in the eastern half of the United States and parts of Canada. The competitive nature and limited palatability of <i>L. cuneata</i> for grazers in the tallgrass prairie has made it an undesirable and invasive weed. Objectives: This study was conducted to investigate an invasive species management plan for restored grasslands and prairie areas. Methods: Study plots (n=144) for experiment 1 (summer treatment) were established at Crab Orchard Wildlife Refuge in Jackson County Illinois in August of 2012 and were situated to contain infestations of the target species. Two herbicides, in five concentrations were applied in August of 2012. A native seed mix was added to a portion of the summer plots later, in February of 2013. These treatments were assessed in June and August of 2013 to determine herbicide effects on stem count and percent cover of <i>L. cuneata</i>, along with the composition and percent cover of other species present. Spring herbicide applications (n=18) for experiment 2 were established, assessed for <i>L. cuneata </i>cover and density, and treated with two herbicide treatments in May of 2013. Spring treatments were identical to existing plots and were re-assessed in August 2013 to determine species composition and the abundance of <i>L. cuneata</i>. Seed was not added to these plots. Analysis: Mixed Model analysis by site was performed to test the effect of herbicide and seeding treatments on <i>L. cuneata</i> for both experiments 1 &2. The summer plots were also tested for effects on other plant groups. A<b> </b>repeated measures PERMANOVA along with ANOSIM and PERMADISP was performed to assess community composition response to seeding and herbicide treatments in the summer plots. Results: Abundance of <i>L. cuneata</i> was reduced 67 to <90% following herbicide treatment in Experiments 1 and 2. There were no differences in the effectiveness of herbicide treatments in in Experiment 1, sites 1 &3, and in Experiment 2. Supplemental seeding in the summer plots did not reduce the abundance of <i>L. cuneata</i> consistently across sites. Conclusion: Considerable short-term control of the target species was achieved in both the summer and spring plots, providing a window of opportunity for the imposition of additional methods of control. However, data from the summer plots suggest recovery of <i>L. cuneata</i> some sites, indicating further control would be necessary, with potentially the addition of other control methods or site alterations.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,053 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».