• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Journals and Magazines
    • Society for Range Management Journal Archives
    • Rangeland Ecology & Management / Journal of Range Management
    • Journal of Range Management, Volume 54 (2001)
    • Journal of Range Management, Volume 54, Number 1 (January 2001)
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Journals and Magazines
    • Society for Range Management Journal Archives
    • Rangeland Ecology & Management / Journal of Range Management
    • Journal of Range Management, Volume 54 (2001)
    • Journal of Range Management, Volume 54, Number 1 (January 2001)
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of UA Campus RepositoryCommunitiesTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournalThis CollectionTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournal

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    About

    AboutUA Faculty PublicationsUA DissertationsUA Master's ThesesUA Honors ThesesUA PressUA YearbooksUA CatalogsUA Libraries

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Dry-weight-rank method assessment in heterogenous communities

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    9587-9468-1-PB.pdf
    Size:
    70.53Kb
    Format:
    PDF
    Download
    Author
    Dowhower, S. L.
    Teague, W. R.
    Ansley, R. J.
    Pinchak, W. E.
    Issue Date
    2001-01-01
    Keywords
    mixed prairie
    ranking
    rapid methods
    Juniperus pinchotii
    Prosopis glandulosa
    stand characteristics
    estimation
    sampling
    Texas
    prairies
    biomass
    botanical composition
    dry matter
    botanical composition
    estimation
    landscapes
    standing crop proportion
    Show allShow less
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Citation
    Dowhower, S. L., Teague, W. R., Ansley, R. J., & Pinchak, W. E. (2001). Dry-weight-rank method assessment in heterogenous communities. Journal of Range Management, 54(1), 71-76.
    Publisher
    Society for Range Management
    Journal
    Journal of Range Management
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10150/643828
    DOI
    10.2307/4003531
    10.2458/azu_jrm_v54i1_dowhower
    Additional Links
    https://rangelands.org/
    Abstract
    Assessment of herbaceous standing crop in heterogeneous range plant communities requires large numbers of samples to account for inherent variability. The dry-weight-rank method (DWR) was developed to eliminate the need for clipping and sorting of herbage to determine relative proportions on a dry weight basis. The technique was assessed for applicability and accuracy in the mixed prairie of the Texas Rolling Plains. Much of the herbage within the communities investigated occurred in monospecific patches that resulted in only 15% of quadrats having 3 species ranked for which DWR was designed. Non-harvest methods of determining grass proportion by species were compared to harvested proportions in mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa Torr.) and redberry juniper (Juniperus pinchotii Sudw.) communities. Estimation methods evaluated were 1) harvest by species, 2) weight estimation by species, 3) DWR with quadrat weighting, 4) unweighted estimated proportion by species, and 5) unweighted DWR. Correlations of non-harvest to harvest proportions were improved with quadrat weighting. Weighting improved values more in the juniper than in the mesquite communities. Although cumulative ranking of DWR multipliers was necessary in 85% of sample quadrats, there was a high correlation (r2>0.995) between weight estimation and weighted DWR and between estimated proportion and unweighted DWR. This indicates that cumulative ranking with the original DWR multipliers was virtually the same as evaluator estimation. Analysis of variance indicated significant differences in non-harvest methods compared to harvesting. Quadrat weighting with DWR was necessary to draw the same statistical conclusions between means that harvest data provided. Ranks are easier to apply and more likely to be applied similarly by individual evaluators than estimated proportions. For sites with high standing crop variation and patchiness of species that require considerable use of cumulative ranking, DWR with quadrat weighting provides adequate determination of species proportions of biomass.
    Type
    text
    Article
    Language
    en
    ISSN
    0022-409X
    ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
    10.2307/4003531
    Scopus Count
    Collections
    Journal of Range Management, Volume 54, Number 1 (January 2001)

    entitlement

     
    The University of Arizona Libraries | 1510 E. University Blvd. | Tucson, AZ 85721-0055
    Tel 520-621-6442 | repository@u.library.arizona.edu
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2017  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.