Conserving All the Pollinators: Variation in Probability of Pollen Transport among Insect Taxa

As concern about declining pollinator populations mounts, it is important to understand the range of insect taxa that provide pollination services. We use pollen transport information acquired over three years in two habitats at Badlands National Park, South Dakota, USA, to compare probabilities of pollen transport among insect taxa and between sexes of bees. Sampling was conducted on 1-ha plots, eight in sparse vegetation (May–October samples; N = 74 surveys) and 12 in wheatgrass prairie vegetation (June–July samples; N = 87 surveys). Insects contacting reproductive parts of flowers were netted, placed individually into tubes charged with ethyl acetate, then transferred to individual labeled glassine envelopes for transport to the lab. Pollen was removed from insect bodies with fuchsin jelly cubes which were then mounted on microscope slides for identification. The probability of taxa transporting only conspecific pollen (with respect to the plant species upon which it was collected), mixed pollen, only non-conspecific, or no pollen was estimated with multinomial logistic regression. Bees were the most commonly captured flower visitor and carried by far the most pollen (females \u3e10× as much as males), but they were most likely to carry mixed pollen loads. Flies, beetles, and wasps were also common flower visitors and beetles were most likely to carry only conspecific pollen. Ants and diurnal lepidopterans were unlikely to carry any pollen. Bees, beetles, flies, and wasps varied in the timing and habitat in which they were most likely to transport pollen, suggesting that all played a role in providing robust pollination services

Long-Term Dynamics of Leafy Spurge (\u3ci\u3eEuphorbia esula\u3c/i\u3e) and its Biocontrol Agent, Flea Beetles in the Genus Aphthona

Three flea beetle species (Aphthona spp.), first introduced into North America in 1988, have come to be regarded as effective biological control organisms for leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula). The black flea beetles (Aphthona lacertosa and A. czwalinae) in particular have been shown to cause reductions in leafy spurge stem counts in the northern Great Plains, while the brown flea beetle (A. nigriscutis) has persisted and spread, but has not been found to be as effective at controlling leafy spurge. The ability of black flea beetles to control leafy spurge in any given year, however, has been found to vary. To better understand the long-term effects of flea beetle herbivory on leafy spurge, we monitored stem counts of leafy spurge and numbers of black and brown flea beetles at three sites on two National Wildlife Refuges in east-central North Dakota, USA, from 1998 to 2006. Brown flea beetle numbers were observed to be negligible on these sites. Over the 9 years of the study, black flea beetles were seen to spread over the three study sites and leafy spurge stem counts declined substantially on two of the three sites. Even at low densities of spurge, black flea beetle populations persisted, a necessary prerequisite for long-term control. We used structural equation models (SEM) to assess the yearly effects of black flea beetles, soil texture, and refuge site on leafy spurge stem counts over this time period. We then used equations developed from the SEM analysis to explore flea beetle–leafy spurge dynamics over time, after controlling for soil texture and refuge. Yearly effect strength of black flea beetles on leafy spurge was found to be modest, largely owing to substantial spatial variability in control. However, simulation results based on prediction coefficients revealed leafy spurge to be highly responsive to increases in flea beetle populations on average

NATIVE AND EUROPEAN HAPLOTYPES OF \u3ci\u3ePHRAGMITES AUSTRALIS\u3c/i\u3e (COMMON REED) IN THE CENTRAL PLATTE RIVER, NEBRASKA

Phragmites australis (common reed) is known to have occurred along the Platte River historically, but recent rapid increases in both distribution and density have begun to impact habitat for migrating sandhill cranes and nesting piping plovers and least terns. Invasiveness in Phragmites has been associated with the incursion of a European genotype (haplotype M) in other areas; determining the genotype of Phragmites along the central Platte River has implications for proper management of the river system. In 2008 we sampled Phragmites patches along the central Platte River from Lexington to Chapman, NE, stratified by bridge segments, to determine the current distribution of haplotype E (native) and haplotype M genotypes. In addition, we did a retrospective analysis of historical Phragmites collections from the central Platte watershed (1902- 2006) at the Bessey Herbarium. Fresh tissue from the 2008 survey and dried tissue from the herbarium specimens were classified as haplotype M or E using the restriction fragment length polymorphism procedure. The European haplotype was predominant in the 2008 samples: only 14 Phragmites shoots were identified as native haplotype E; 224 were non-native haplotype M. The retrospective analysis revealed primarily native haplotype individuals. Only collections made in Lancaster County, near Lincoln, NE, were haplotype M, and the earliest of these was collected in 1973

Factors affecting post-control reinvasion by seed of an invasive species, \u3ci\u3ePhragmites australis\u3c/i\u3e, in the central Platte River, Nebraska

Invasive plants, such as Phragmites australis, can profoundly affect channel environments of large rivers by stabilizing sediments and altering water flows. Invasive plant removal is considered necessary where restoration of dynamic channels is needed to provide critical habitat for species of conservation concern. However, these programs are widely reported to be inefficient. Post-control reinvasion is frequent, suggesting increased attention is needed to prevent seed regeneration. To develop more effective responses to this invader in the Central Platte River (Nebraska,USA), we investigated several aspects of Phragmites seed ecology potentially linked to post-control reinvasion, in comparison to other common species: extent of viable seed production, importance of water transport, and regeneration responses to hydrology. We observed that although Phragmites seed does not mature until very late in the ice-free season, populations produce significant amounts of viable seed (\u3e50 %of filled seed). Most seed transported via water in the Platte River are invasive perennial species, although Phragmites abundances are much lower than species such as Lythrum salicaria, Cyperus esculentus and Phalaris arundinacea. Seed regeneration of Phragmites varies greatly depending on hydrology, especially timing of water level changes. Flood events coinciding with the beginning of seedling emergence reduced establishment by as much as 59 % compared to flood events that occurred a few weeks later. Results of these investigations suggest that prevention of seed set (i.e., by removal of flowering culms) should be a priority in vegetation stands not being treated annually. After seeds are in the seedbank, preventing reinvasion using prescribed flooding has a low chance of success given that Phragmites can regenerate in a wide variety of hydrologic microsites

Looking to the Future: Key Points for Sustainable Management of Northern Great Plains Grasslands

The grasslands of the northern Great Plains (NGP) region of North America are considered endangered ecosystems and priority conservation areas yet have great ecological and economic importance. Grasslands in the NGP are no longer self-regulating adaptive systems. The challenges to these grasslands are widespread and serious (e.g. climate change, invasive species, fragmentation, altered disturbance regimes, and anthropogenic chemical loads). Because the challenges facing the region are dynamic, complex, and persistent, a paradigm shift in how we approach restoration and management of the grasslands in the NGP is imperative. The goal of this article is to highlight four key points for land managers and restoration practitioners to consider when planning management or restoration actions. First, we discuss the appropriateness of using historical fidelity as a restoration or management target because of changing climate, widespread pervasiveness of invasive species, the high level of fragmentation, and altered disturbance regimes. Second, we highlight ecosystem resilience and long-term population persistence as alternative targets. Third, because the NGP is so heavily impacted with anthropogenic chemical loading, we discuss the risks of ecological traps and extinction debt. Finally, we highlight the importance of using adaptive management and having patience during restoration and management. Consideration of these four points will help management and restoration of grasslands move toward a more successful and sustainable future. Although we specifically focus on the NGP of North America, these same issues and considerations apply to grasslands and many other ecosystems globally

Soil Modification by Invasive Plants: Effects on Native and Invasive Species of Mixed-Grass Prairies

Invasive plants are capable of modifying attributes of soil to facilitate further invasion by conspecifics and other invasive species. We assessed this capability in three important plant invaders of grasslands in the Great Plains region of North America: leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula), smooth brome (Bromus inermis) and crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum). In a glasshouse, these three invasives or a group of native species were grown separately through three cycles of growth and soil conditioning in both steam-pasteurized and non-pasteurized soils, after which we assessed seedling growth in these soils. Two of the three invasive species, Bromus and Agropyron, exhibited significant self-facilitation via soil modification. Bromus and Agropyron also had significant facilitative effects on other invasives via soil modification, while Euphorbia had significant antagonistic effects on the other invasives. Both Agropyron and Euphorbia consistently suppressed growth of two of three native forbs, while three native grasses were generally less affected. Almost all intra- and interspecific effects of invasive soil conditioning were dependent upon presence of soil biota from field sites where these species were successful invaders. Overall, these results suggest that that invasive modification of soil microbiota can facilitate plant invasion directly or via ‘cross-facilitation’ of other invasive species, and moreover has potential to impede restoration of native communities after removal of an invasive species. However, certain native species that are relatively insensitive to altered soil biota (as we observed in the case of the forb Linum lewisii and the native grasses), may be valuable as ‘nurse’ species in restoration efforts

A Framework for Establishing Restoration Goals for Contaminated Ecosystems

This article represents 1 of 6 articles in the special series “Restoration of Impaired Ecosystems: An Ounce of Prevention or a Pound of Cure?” The articles result from a Technical Workshop organized by SETAC and the Society for Ecological Restoration, held June 2014 in Jackson, Wyoming, that focused on advancing the practice of restoring ecosystems that have been contaminated or impaired from industrial activities.As natural resources become increasingly limited, the value of restoring contaminated sites, both terrestrial and aquatic, becomes increasingly apparent. Traditionally, goals for remediation have been set before any consideration of goals for ecological restoration. The goals for remediation have focused on removing or limiting contamination whereas restoration goals have targeted the ultimate end use. Here, we present a framework for developing a comprehensive set of achievable goals for ecological restoration of contaminated sites to be used in concert with determining goals for remediation. This framework was developed during a Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) and Society of Ecological Restoration (SER) cosponsored workshop that brought together experts from multiple countries. Although most members were from North America, this framework is designed for use internationally. We discuss the integration of establishing goals for both contaminant remediation and overall restoration, and the need to include both the restoration of ecological and socio-cultural-economic value in the context of contaminated sites. Although recognizing that in some countries there may be regulatory issues associated with contaminants and clean up, landscape setting and social drivers can inform the restoration goals. We provide a decision tree support tool to guide the establishment of restoration goals for contaminated ecosystems. The overall intent of this decision tree is to provide a framework for goal setting and to identify outcomes achievable given the contamination present at a site. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:264–272. 2015 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC

Improving Ecological Restoration to Curb Biotic Invasion—A Practical Guide

Common practices for invasive species control and management include physical, chemical, and biological approaches. The first two approaches have clear limitations and may lead to unintended (negative) consequences, unless carefully planned and implemented. For example, physical removal rarely completely eradicates the targeted invasive species and can cause disturbances that facilitate new invasions by nonnative species from nearby habitats. Chemical treatments can harm native, and especially rare, species through unanticipated side effects. Biological methods may be classified as biocontrol and the ecological approach. Similar to physical and chemical methods, biocontrol also has limitations and sometimes leads to unintended consequences. Therefore, a relatively safer and more practical choice may be the ecological approach, which has two major components: (1) restoration of native species and (2) biomass manipulation of the restored community, such as selective grazing or prescribed burning (to achieve and maintain viable population sizes). Restoration requires well-planned and implemented planting designs that consider alpha-, beta-, and gamma-diversity and the abundance of native and invasive component species at local, landscape, and regional levels. Given the extensive destruction or degradation of natural habitats around the world, restoration could be most effective for enhancing ecosystem resilience and resistance to biotic invasions. At the same time, ecosystems in human-dominated landscapes, especially those newly restored, require close monitoring and careful intervention (e.g., through biomass manipulation), especially when successional trajectories are not moving as intended. Biomass management frequently uses prescribed burning, grazing, harvesting, and thinning to maintain overall ecosystem health and sustainability. Thus, the resulting optimal, balanced, and relatively stable ecological conditions could more effectively limit the spread and establishment of invasive species. Here we review the literature (especially within the last decade) on ecological approaches that involve biodiversity, biomass, and productivity, three key community/ecosystem variables that reciprocally influence one another. We focus on the common and most feasible ecological practices that can aid in resisting new invasions and/or suppressing the dominance of existing invasive species. We contend that, because of the strong influences from neighboring areas (i.e., as exotic species pools), local restoration and management efforts in the future need to consider the regional context and projected climate changes

Managing Invasive Plants on Great Plains Grasslands: A Discussion of Current Challenges

The Great Plains of North America encompass approximately 1,300,000 km2 of land from Texas to Saskatchewan. The integrity of these lands is under continual assault by long-established and newly-arrived invasive plant species, which can threaten native species and diminish land values and ecological goods and services by degrading desired grassland resources. The Great Plains are a mixture of privately and publicly owned lands, which leads to a patchwork of varying management goals and strategies for controlling invasive plants. Continually updated knowledge is required for efficient and effective management of threats posed by changing environments and invasive plants. Here we discuss current challenges, contemporary management strategies, and management tools and their integration, in hopes of presenting a knowledge resource for new and experienced land managers and others involved in making decisions regarding invasive plant management in the Great Plains

Managing Invasive Plants on Great Plains Grasslands: A Discussion of Current Challenges

The Great Plains of North America encompass approximately 1,300,000 km2 of land from Texas to Saskatchewan. The integrity of these lands is under continual assault by long-established and newly-arrived invasive plant species, which can threaten native species and diminish land values and ecological goods and services by degrading desired grassland resources. The Great Plains are a mixture of privately and publicly owned lands, which leads to a patchwork of varying management goals and strategies for controlling invasive plants. Continually updated knowledge is required for efficient and effective management of threats posed by changing environments and invasive plants. Here we discuss current challenges, contemporary management strategies, and management tools and their integration, in hopes of presenting a knowledge resource for new and experienced land managers and others involved in making decisions regarding invasive plant management in the Great Plains