The Use of Native Plants for Revegetation along West Virginia ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 6. Total plant cover of Fall plantings at Baker with and without fertilizer, seeded with various mixtures, and treatment combinations. Treatment Baker Sep-03 Baker Sep-04 Fertilizer ---------%--------- Fertilized 66 a* 65 a Unfertilized Seed Mix 54 b 59 a DOH 68 a 81 a DOH-Native 65 ab 71 a ½ DOH-Native 55 ab 72 a Native 61 ab 40 b Control Interactions 52 b 46 b DOH Fertilized 75 a 87 a DOH Unfertilized 62 a 75 ab DOH-Native Fertilized 67 a 69 bc DOH-Native Unfertilized 64 a 74 b ½ DOH-Native Fertilized 62 a 74 b ½ DOH-Native Unfertilized 47 b 69 bc Native Fertilized 61 a 38 d Native Unfertilized 60 a 41 d Control Fertilized 65 a 57 c Control Unfertilized 38 b 34 d *Treatments within main effects (fertilizer, seed mix, or interactions) and within columns (sites) with the same letter are not significantly different (p=0.05). DOH-Native plots were significantly different from the ½ DOH-Native, Native, and Control plots. Similar trends were found for the Seed Mix-Fertilizer interactions. Total cover was similar across all of the Fall established plots at Hazelton for all surveys (Table 8). The only significant interactions were found for the Summer 2003 survey (Table 29, Appendix). At the beginning of the first growing season (Summer 2003), only the DOH plots were found to respond significantly to fertilizer. 20
Table 7. Total plant cover of Spring plantings at Hazelton with and without fertilizer, seeded with various mixtures, and treatment combinations. Treatment Hazelton Sep-02 Hazelton Sep-03 Hazelton Sep-04 Fertilizer -------------%------------- Fertilized 67 a* 78 a 88 a Unfertilized Seed Mix 60 a 76 a 90 a DOH 65 a 82 a 86 a DOH-Native 71 a 86 a 82 a ½ DOH-Native 65 a 72 a 92 a Native 59 a 71 a 91 a Control Interactions 56 a 75 a 92 a DOH Fertilized 68 ab 80 ab 76 bc DOH Unfertilized 63 bc 83 ab 96 a DOH-Native Fertilized 79 a 88 a 92 ab DOH-Native Unfertilized 63 bc 84 a 73 c ½ DOH-Native Fertilized 74 ab 68 bc 91 ab ½ DOH-Native Unfertilized 56 c 75 abc 93 ab Native Fertilized 63 bc 78 abc 88 abc Native Unfertilized 56 c 64 c 94 a Control Fertilized 50 c 78 abc 93 ab Control Unfertilized 63 bc 71 abc 92 ab *Treatments within main effects (fertilizer, seed mix, or interactions) and within columns (sites) with the same letter are not significantly different (p=0.05). Unfertilized DOH plots had significantly less total cover when compared to all other plots. Most significant effects disappeared by the Summer 2004 sampling, with unfertilized Control plots having less total cover than all others. Parkersburg. The Parkersburg site had very similar total cover averages across all treatments, especially in the October 2002 sampling (Table 9). This is due to Department of Highway crews inadvertently hydro-seeding over the plots in the summer of 2002. Because of this, the vegetation in all plots was nearly 100% and composed of DOH seeded species. As a result, no significant differences were found for Fall surveys and few were found for Summer 21
Page 1 and 2: The Use of Native Plants for Revege
Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract………
Page 5 and 6: Table 15. Total plant cover of Spri
Page 7 and 8: 1. Introduction Due to the mountain
Page 9 and 10: Table 1. Species, mixtures and rate
Page 11 and 12: cost more than $5.00 per pound of p
Page 13 and 14: (1987) found good stands of Switchg
Page 15 and 16: Brown-eyed Susan (Rudbeckia triloba
Page 17 and 18: high temperatures, drought, or poor
Page 19 and 20: Figure 1. Map of research sites inc
Page 21 and 22: Table 2. Seeded species and seeding
Page 23 and 24: Table 4. Seeded species and seeding
Page 25: Table 5. Total plant cover of Sprin
Page 29 and 30: Table 9. Total plant cover of Sprin
Page 31 and 32: Table 11. Seeded native cover of Fa
Page 33 and 34: Table 13. Seeded native cover of Fa
Page 35 and 36: Results indicate that one cannot se
Page 39 and 40: Table 18. Total plant cover and see
Page 41 and 42: Table 20. Seeded native cover of Sp
Page 43 and 44: Table 22. Individual species respon
Page 45 and 46: cover prior to plot establishment c
Page 47 and 48: Table 23. Chemical properties of th
Page 49 and 50: native cover. Some of the younger s
Page 51 and 52: program. The disturbance of a strip
Page 53 and 54: Hsu, F.H., C.J. Nelson, and A.G. Ma
Page 55 and 56: Vassey, T.L., J.R. George, and R.E.
Page 57 and 58: Table 27. Total plant cover of Fall
Page 59 and 60: Table 29. Total plant cover of Fall
Page 71: Table 41. Seeded native cover of Sp

The Use of Native Plants for Revegetation along West Virginia ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?