We are upgrading the repository! A content freeze is in effect until December 6th, 2024 - no new submissions will be accepted; however, all content already published will remain publicly available. Please reach out to repository@u.library.arizona.edu with your questions, or if you are a UA affiliate who needs to make content available soon. Note that any new user accounts created after September 22, 2024 will need to be recreated by the user in November after our migration is completed.

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorThacker, Eric T.
dc.contributor.authorGillen, Robert L.
dc.contributor.authorGunter, Stacey A.
dc.contributor.authorSpringer, Tim L.
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-05T06:23:28Z
dc.date.available2020-09-05T06:23:28Z
dc.date.issued2012-09-01
dc.identifier.citationThacker, E. T., Gillen, R. L., Gunter, S. A., & Springer, T. L. (2012). Chemical control of sand sagebrush: implications for lesser prairie-chicken habitat. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 65(5), 516-522.
dc.identifier.issn0022-409X
dc.identifier.doi10.2111/REM-D-11-00164.1
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/642661
dc.description.abstractTraditional management of sand sagebrush (Artemisia filifolia) rangelands has emphasized sagebrush control to increase forage for livestock. Since the 1950s shrub removal has been primarily achieved with herbicides. Concerns over declining lesser prairie chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus; LPC) populations have led to increased scrutiny over the use of herbicides to control shrubs. The objective of our research was to describe changes to LPC habitat qualities following chemical control of sand sagebrush in northwest Oklahoma. Study pastures ranged in size from 10 to 21 ha. Five pastures were sprayed with 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) in 2003 (RECENT), five were sprayed with 2,4-D in 1984 (OLD), and four received no treatment (SAGE). We measured habitat structure (sagebrush cover, sagebrush density, visual obstruction [VO], and basal grass cover), and dietary resources (forb density, forb richness, and grasshopper density) in all pastures from 2003 to 2006. OLD and RECENT pastures had less sagebrush (cover and density) and VO than SAGE pastures. OLD pastures produced more annual forbs than either SAGE or RECENT pastures. SAGE pastures had more perennial forbs than RECENT pastures. Herbicide application reduced protective cover while providing no increase in forb abundance in RECENT pastures. Our results indicated that it may take several years to realize increases in annual forbs following application of 2,4-D. However, loss of protective cover may persist for multiple years (20+ yr), and removal of sagebrush did not increase forb richness or grasshopper abundance. Thus, 2,4-D may have limited use as a habitat management tool because it takes numerous years to reap the benefit of increased forb abundance while reducing habitat structure in the long term./El manejo tradicional de pastizales de artemisa (Artemisia filifolia) ha enfatizado el control de artemisa para aumentar el forraje para el ganado. Desde los 1950s la remoción de arbustivas ha sido lograda principalmente con herbicidas. La preocupación por la disminución de las poblaciones de gallinas de pradera (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus; LPC) ha llevado a aumentar la vigilancia sobre el uso de herbicidas para el control de arbustivas. El objetivo de nuestra investigación fue describir los cambios en la calidad del hábitat de LPC después de controles químicos de Artemisia filifolia en el noroeste de Oklahoma. Los potreros en estudio variaron en tamaño de 10 a 21 ha. Cinco potreros fueron asperjados con 2,4-acido diclorofenoxiacético (2,4-D) en 2003 (RECIENTE), otros cinco fueron asperjados con 2,4-D en 1984 (VIEJO) y cuatro no recibieron tratamiento (ARTEMISA). Medimos la estructura del hábitat (cobertura y densidad de artemisa, obstrucción visual [OV] y cobertura basal de pastos) y fuentes de dieta (densidad y riqueza de hierbas y densidad de chapulines) en todos los potreros de 2003 a 2006. Potreros VIEJO Y RECIENTE tuvieron menos artemisa (cobertura y densidad) y OV que los potreros ARTEMISA. Los porteros VIEJO produjeron más hierbas anuales los porteros ARTEMISA Y RECIENTE. Los potreros ARTEMISA tuvieron más hierbas perennes que los potreros RECIENTE. La aplicación de herbicida reduce la cubierta protectora mientras que no aumenta la abundancia de hierbas en los potreros RECIENTE. Nuestros resultados indican que puede tomar varios años el lograr incrementar las hierbas anuales después de la aplicación de 2,4-D. Sin embargo, la pérdida de cubierta protectora podrá mantenerse por múltiples años (20+ años) y el remover la artemisa no aumenta la riqueza de hierbas y abundancia de chapulines. Entonces, 2,4-D podrá tener uso limitado como herramienta de manejo de hábitat porque toma muchos años obtener el beneficio de aumentar la abundancia de hierbas mientras que se reduce la estructura del hábitat en el largo plazo.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSociety for Range Management
dc.relation.urlhttps://rangelands.org/
dc.rightsCopyright © Society for Range Management.
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
dc.subjectArtemisia filifolia
dc.subjecthabitat management
dc.subjectmixed prairie
dc.subjectshrub control
dc.titleChemical Control of Sand Sagebrush: Implications for Lesser Prairie-Chicken Habitat
dc.typetext
dc.typeArticle
dc.identifier.journalRangeland Ecology & Management
dc.description.collectioninformationThe Rangeland Ecology & Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact lbry-journals@email.arizona.edu for further information.
dc.eprint.versionFinal published version
dc.description.admin-noteMigrated from OJS platform August 2020
dc.source.volume65
dc.source.issue5
dc.source.beginpage516-522
refterms.dateFOA2020-09-05T06:23:28Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
22789-42567-1-PB.pdf
Size:
88.49Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record