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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 17. Total plant cover of Spring plantings at Elkins with and without fertilizer, seeded with various mixtures, and treatment combinations. Treatment Elkins Sep-03 Elkins Sep-04 Fertilizer ---------%--------- Fertilized 68 a* 67 a Unfertilized Disturbance 54 b 57 b Control 74 a 66 a Seed 71 a 67 a Mow 72 a 70 a Till 51 b 62 a Herbicide Interactions 38 b 44 b Contol Fertilized 81 a 69 ab Control Unfertilized 66 b 63 b Seed Fertilized 83 a 75 a Seed Unfertilized 60 b 59 bc Mow Fertilized 82 a 74 ab Mow Unfertilized 62 b 67 ab Till Fertilized 56 bc 67 ab Till Unfertilized 45c 58 bc Herbicide Fertilized 38 c 50 cd Herbicide Unfertilized 38 c 38 d *Treatments within main effects (fertilizer, disturbance, or interactions) and within columns (sites) with the same letter are not significantly different (p=0.05). Elkins. Trends were similar for all surveys of the Elkins site (Table 17). Herbicide treated plots had the lowest total cover and were significantly different from other disturbance treatments, and fertilizer was found to significantly increase total cover. For the Fall established plots at the Elkins site (Table 18), fertilizer significantly increased total cover. Control, Seeded, and Mowed plots had significantly higher total cover than Tilled and Herbicide treated plots. When comparing Fall and Spring established plots it was found that Fall established plots had significantly lower total cover for Mow, Tilled, and fertilized Control plots compared to Spring established plots. 32
Table 18. Total plant cover and seeded native cover of Fall plantings at Elkins with and without fertilizer, seeded with various mixtures, and treatment combinations, September 2004. Treatment Total 33 Seeded Native Fertilizer ---------%--------- Fertilized 57 a* 2 a Unfertilized 42 b 6 a Disturbance Control 55 a 0 b Seed 60 a 1 b Mow 55 a 0 b Till 42 b 6 a Herbicide 37 b 11 a Interactions Contol Fertilized 61 a 0 b Control Unfertilized 50 ac 0 b Seed Fertilized 68 a 0 b Seed Unfertilized 51 ac 2 b Mow Fertilized 68 a 0 b Mow Unfertilized 43 bc 0 b Till Fertilized 47 bc 1 b Till Unfertilized 38 bc 12 a Herbicide Fertilized 44 bc 8 a Herbicide Unfertilized 30 b 15 a *Treatments within main effects (fertilizer, disturbance, or interactions) and within columns (sites) with the same letter are not significantly different (p=0.05). Seeded Native Plant Cover Percent cover contributed by the seeded natives was minimal at all sites until the second growing season (2004). In 2003, seeded native cover was greatest at 16% in Tilled and Herbicide treated plots at the Elkins site, while in 2004 it had increased to 30-45% in the same plots. Fertilizer had no significant effect on seeded native cover, but disturbance did. While having the lowest total plant cover, the Tilled and Herbicide treated plots consistently had the highest cover contributed by the seeded natives (14% and 15%, respectively).
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 and 26: Table 5. 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 37: Table 16. Total plant cover of Spri
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 67 and 68: Table 37. Total plant cover of Spri
Page 71: Table 41. Seeded native cover of Sp

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?