Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T03:35:37.056Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of Forage Kochia on Seedling Growth of Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) and Perennial Grasses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2019

Parmeshwor Aryal
Affiliation:
Graduate Student, Department of Plant Sciences, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY, USA
M. Anowarul Islam*
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Plant Sciences, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY, USA
*
*Author for correspondence: M. Anowarul Islam, Department of Plant Sciences, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071. (Email: mislam@uwyo.edu)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Forage kochia [Bassia prostrata (L.) A. J. Scott] is competitive with annual weeds and has potential for use in reclamation of disturbed land. However, land managers are reluctant to use forage kochia in revegetation programs due to lack of understanding of its compatibility with or invasiveness in the native plant community. We conducted two greenhouse experiments, one to compare the competitive effect of forage kochia versus perennial grasses on growth of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L.) and one to study the effect of forage kochia on growth of native perennial grasses. In the first experiment, a single seedling of B. tectorum was grown with increasing neighbor densities (0 to 5 seedlings pot−1) of either forage kochia, crested wheatgrass [Agropyron cristatum (L.) Gaertner × A. desertorum (Fisch. ex Link) Schultes; nonnative perennial grass], or thickspike wheatgrass [Elymus lanceolatus (Scribn. & J. G. Sm.) Gould; native perennial grass]. Bromus tectorum growth was reduced moderately by all three perennial neighbors, but A. cristatum and E. lanceolatus had more effect on B. tectorum when compared with forage kochia. This experiment was repeated and similar results were observed. In the second experiment, forage kochia was grown with each of four native cool-season grass species: basin wildrye [Leymus cinereus (Scribn. & Merr.) Á. Löve], bluebunch wheatgrass [Pseudoroegneria spicata (Pursh) Á. Löve], E. lanceolatus, and western wheatgrass [Pascopyrum smithii (Rydb.) Á. Löve]. Forage kochia had no effect on height, tiller number, and aboveground biomass of native grasses. Similarly, native grasses did not show a significant effect on forage kochia seedlings. This experiment was also repeated, and forage kochia somewhat reduced the aboveground biomass of L. cinereus and P. spicata. However, all native grasses significantly reduced change in height, branching, and aboveground biomass of forage kochia. These results suggest that forage kochia interfered with B. tectorum seedling growth, but it showed little competitive effect on native grass seedlings.

Type
Note
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2018 

Introduction

A major threat to the western rangelands is invasion by exotic weeds. Overgrazing, drought (Brooks and Pyke Reference Brooks and Pyke2001; O’Connor Reference O’Connor1991; Pyke Reference Pyke1999), wildfire (Young and Evans Reference Young and Evans1978), and disturbance for energy development opened the landscape for further spread of invasive exotic species (Copeland et al. Reference Copeland, Pocewicz and Kiesecker2011). Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L.) is one of the highly invasive species in the United States (Knapp Reference Knapp1996; Mack Reference Mack2011; Menalled et al. Reference Menalled, Mangold and Davis2008). It is the dominant species on about 20 million hectares in the western United States (Bradley and Mustard Reference Bradley and Mustard2005). Abundant soil seed reserve (Young et al. Reference Young, Evans and Eckert1969), early germination pattern (Menalled et al. Reference Menalled, Mangold and Davis2008; Young et al. Reference Young, Evans and Eckert1969), better uptake of soil moisture (Knapp Reference Knapp1996) and nitrogen (Blank and Morgan Reference Blank and Morgan2011; Lowe et al. Reference Lowe, Lauenroth and Burke2003), promotion of grass-fire cycle, and tolerance to fire regimes (Belnap and Phillips Reference Belnap and Phillips2001; Bolton et al. Reference Bolton, Smith and Link1993; Brandt and Rickard Reference Brandt and Rickard1994; Brooks et al. Reference Brooks, D’Antonio, Richardson, Grace, Keeley, Ditomaso, Hobbs, Pellant and Pyke2004; Hulbert Reference Hulbert1955; Stewart and Hull Reference Stewart and Hull1949; Young et al. Reference Young, Evans, Eckert and Kay1987) contribute to competitive advantage and dominance of B. tectorum over native vegetation. Bromus tectorum–dominated areas can be restored by establishing and maintaining stands of robust perennial forage species (Asay et al. Reference Asay, Horton, Jensen and Palazzo2001; Cronin and Williams Reference Cronin and Williams1966; Thompson et al. Reference Thompson, Roundy, McArthur, Jessop, Waldron and Davis2006; Whitson and Koch Reference Whitson and Koch1998). Forage kochia [Bassia prostrata (L.) A. J. Scott] is a promising forage species for restoring annual weed–infested areas.

Management Implications

Previous reports suggest that forage kochia (Bassia prostrata) can compete with annual weeds. However, there are no reports comparing competitive ability of forage kochia with other potential perennial native or nonnative species. Our study investigated whether forage kochia could compete with Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass), an invasive annual weed, better than potential perennial grasses such as Agropyron cristatum (crested wheatgrass; nonnative) and Elymus lanceolatus (thickspike wheatgrass; native). Although forage kochia seedlings moderately competed with B. tectorum, perennial grass seedlings reduced B. tectorum growth more than forage kochia at the seedling stage. There is a concern that forage kochia may compete with native perennials. To address this, we also conducted a greenhouse experiment and observed that forage kochia has little to no effect on the growth of native perennial grass seedlings. On the contrary, native grass seedlings negatively influenced the growth of forage kochia seedlings. This is important, because it shows that forage kochia seedlings compete with B. tectorum, but not with native grass seedlings. Forage kochia has been considered a potentially important forage and reclamation species, and our study shows the potential for future field-based research to more fully explore forage kochia and its competitive ability against B. tectorum and its compatibility with native perennials.

Forage kochia is a desirable perennial species for greenstripping (Clements et al. Reference Clements, Gray and Young1997; Harrison et al. Reference Harrison, Waldron, Jensen, Page, Monaco, Horton and Palazzo2002; Monsen Reference Monsen1994; Pellant Reference Pellant1990), reclamation of drastically disturbed areas, and forage production during fall and winter seasons in the semiarid rangelands (Harrison et al. Reference Harrison, Chatterton, Waldron, Davenport, Palazzo, Horton and Asay2000, Reference Harrison, Waldron, Jensen, Page, Monaco, Horton and Palazzo2002; Keller and Bleak Reference Keller and Bleak1974; McArthur et al. Reference McArthur, Guinta and Plummer1974; Sullivan et al. Reference Sullivan, Anderson and Fugal2013). It is a drought- and salt-tolerant species (Keller and Bleak Reference Keller and Bleak1974; Stevens et al. Reference Stevens, Jorgensen, McArthur and Davis1985) that can compete with annual exotic weeds such as halogeton [Halogeton glomeratus (M. Bieb.) C. A. Mey.] (Stevens and McArthur Reference Stevens and McArthur1990), B. tectorum (McArthur et al. Reference McArthur, Blauer and Stevens1990; Monsen and Turnipseed Reference Monsen and Turnipseed1990), and saltwort (Salsola kali L.) (Koch and Asay Reference Koch and Asay2001). Generally, it can be seeded either in late fall, winter, or early spring. Forage kochia emerges in the early spring and competes with invasive weeds such as B. tectorum for soil moisture (Monaco Reference Monaco2004).

In spite of the benefits of forage kochia, there is a concern that it may outcompete native plants and spread into native rangelands, perhaps because nonnative plants establish and spread in new areas by acquiring resources faster than native plants (Levine et al. Reference Levine, Vila, D’Antonio, Dukes, Grigulis and Lavorel2003; Rees et al. Reference Rees, Condit, Crawley, Pacala and Tilman2001). Forage kochia spreads in most unseeded areas adjacent to seeded areas (Blauer et al. Reference Blauer, McArthur, Stevens and Nelson1993; Gray and Muir Reference Gray and Muir2013; Harrison et al. Reference Harrison, Chatterton, Waldron, Davenport, Palazzo, Horton and Asay2000). However, many researchers have suggested forage kochia is not invasive in perennial plant communities (Harrison et al. Reference Harrison, Chatterton, Waldron, Davenport, Palazzo, Horton and Asay2000, Reference Harrison, Waldron, Jensen, Page, Monaco, Horton and Palazzo2002; Monaco et al. Reference Monaco, Waldron, Newhall and Horton2003; Pendleton et al. Reference Pendleton, Frischknecht and McArthur1992; Waldron et al. Reference Waldron, Eun, ZoBell and Olson2010). Nevertheless, there is limited information available on its competitiveness with native species (Harrison et al. Reference Harrison, Chatterton, Waldron, Davenport, Palazzo, Horton and Asay2000; Monaco et al. Reference Monaco, Waldron, Newhall and Horton2003). Further investigations of potential interactions of forage kochia with native perennial grasses will augment the existing literature and help land managers decide whether to use it for reclamation or as a forage species. Therefore, the specific objectives of this study were: (1) to compare the effect of forage kochia versus perennial cool-season grasses on B. tectorum seedling growth and (2) to evaluate the effect of forage kochia on native perennial cool-season grasses during the seedling stage.

Materials and Methods

Greenhouse experiments were conducted at the Laramie Research and Extension Center greenhouse complex, Laramie, WY, from January 2014 to February 2015. The air temperature was maintained at approximately 24 C during daytime and 18 C during nighttime. There was no supplemental lighting.

Bromus tectorum Study

The target-neighbor design (Gibson et al. Reference Gibson, Connolly, Hartnett and Weidenhamer1999; Goldberg and Fleetwood Reference Goldberg and Fleetwood1987) was used to determine competitive ability of neighbor species against a target species. In this study, the target species was B. tectorum and neighbor species included ‘Immigrant’ forage kochia (nonnative perennial subshrub), ‘Critana’ thickspike wheatgrass [Elymus lanceolatus (Scribn. & J. G. Sm.) Gould; native perennial grass], and ‘Hycrest’ crested wheatgrass [Agropyron cristatum (L.) Gaertner × A. desertorum (Fisch. Ex Link) Schultes; nonnative perennial grass].

Bromus tectorum and three neighbor species were sown into black plastic propagation trays (53-cm length by 28-cm width by 5-cm height) with drainage holes on January 11, 2014. Before seeding, trays were filled to within 2.5 cm of the rim with the greenhouse potting media (mixture of one part sand and two parts media containing peat moss, vermiculite, and rice hulls). Seedlings were transplanted into 1.5-L pots (15-cm deep) at 2 wk after seeding. Each neighbor species was transplanted in increasing densities (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 seedlings pot−1) equidistant around 1 target seedling planted in the center of the pot. Before transplanting, pots were filled with greenhouse potting media (Table 1). During the first week of transplanting, dead seedlings were replaced by new seedlings of the same age. Eighteen treatments (3 neighbor species by 6 densities), each replicated six times, were arranged in a completely randomized design (CRD). Pots were given approximately 150 ml water on alternate days, but no fertilizer was applied. The pots were rearranged biweekly to minimize microenvironmental effects in the greenhouse. Tiller number and height of B. tectorum plants were measured at 2 wk after transplanting and before harvesting. Grass shoots with at least 3 leaves were counted as tillers. The plant height was taken from the soil surface to the extended tip of the longest live grass leaf. The difference between initial values (2wk after transplanting) and final values (before harvesting) for tiller number and plant height were response variables. Aboveground plant parts were harvested on March 23, 2014, oven-dried for 48 h at 60 C, and weighed to determine B. tectorum dry biomass.

Table 1 Properties of potting media used in greenhouse experiments.

The same design and methods were used for the repeated study conducted during fall 2014; however, Laramie field soil (fine-loamy, mixed, Borollic Haplargids; Table 1) was used instead of greenhouse potting media. All species were seeded on September 28, 2014, and transplanted into 1.5-L pots at 2 wk after seeding. Aboveground shoots were harvested on January 13, 2015.

Statistical analyses were conducted separately for each study using SAS software (SAS institute 2014). For testing the relationships between B. tectorum growth parameters and neighbor density within each neighbor species, regression analysis (r2) was determined using PROC REG, and linear-regression models were fit based on residual plots (scatter plot of residuals vs. neighbor density variable). An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to compare slopes of three regression lines using PROC GLM.

Native Grass Study

Four native perennial grasses: ‘Anatone’ bluebunch wheatgrass [Pseudoroegneria spicata (Pursh) Á. Löve], ‘Magnar’ basin wildrye [Leymus cinereus (Scribn. & Merr.) Á. Löve], ‘Critana’ E. lanceolatus, and ‘Rosana’ western wheatgrass [Pascopyrum smithii (Rydb.) Á. Löve] were used to study their interaction with Immigrant forage kochia. In this study, treatments consisted of forage kochia grown alone, each of four native grasses grown alone, and one individual of each native species grown with one individual forage kochia seedling. Treatments were arranged in a CRD with five replicates. All treatments were established by sowing seeds in respective pots on June 13, 2014, and seedlings in individual pots were thinned to the desired number of plants for each treatment on June 28, 2014. Pot arrangement, watering, and fertilization were done following the same procedures described earlier. Plant height, number of branches (forage kochia), and tiller number (grass) were measured after thinning (June 28, 2014) and before harvesting. Plant height was measured from the pot soil surface to the top of forage kochia main stem or the extended tip of longest live grass leaf. A tiller was a grass shoot with at least 3 leaves. The differences between initial (after thinning) and final data (before harvesting) were considered as response variables for respective parameters. No mortality was observed during the study period. Aboveground biomass was harvested on October 28, 2014, oven-dried for 48 h at 60 C, and weighed to determine dry biomass. The study was repeated using the same design. Planting was done on November 1, 2014, and thinning occurred on November 15, 2014. Laramie field soil was used instead of greenhouse potting media in the second study period (Table 1). The study was harvested on February 16, 2015.

Statistical analyses were conducted separately for each study using PROC GLM in SAS software (SAS institute 2014). Forage kochia plant characteristics and aboveground biomass data were subjected to statistical analysis using a CRD. A two-group t test (α=0.05) was conducted for comparison within each native species when grown with and without the forage kochia companion.

Results and Discussion

Bromus tectorum Study

Results from Study 1 showed that change in height of B. tectorum (Δheight) was significantly influenced by different neighbor densities of forage kochia and E. lanceolatus, but not by neighbor densities of A. cristatum (Figure 1A1). However, ANCOVA analysis showed that the slopes of three regression lines were not significantly different (P>0.05), and there were no differences in B. tectorum Δheight among these three neighbor species. In Study 2, B. tectorum Δheight was reduced by increasing density of A. cristatum and E. lanceolatus, but not forage kochia Figure 1A2). The slopes differed (P<0.05) across three regression lines. Agropyron cristatum and E. lanceolatus appeared more effective in reducing B. tectorum height than forage kochia. Linear regression analyses showed that increase in B. tectorum tiller number (Δtiller) was negatively related to neighbor density of all neighbor species (Figure 1B1 and B2). However, the slopes of three regression lines were not significantly different (P>0.05) in Study 1, but were different (P=0.05) across three regression lines in Study 2. The change in B. tectorum tiller number was lower when grown with each perennial grass than when grown with forage kochia. In both studies, regression analyses showed that the effect of neighbor density on B. tectorum shoot biomass was significant for all neighbor species (Figure 1C1 and C2). These three slopes were not different (P>0.05), and pairwise comparisons among neighbor species showed that forage kochia was not as effective in reducing B. tectorum shoot biomass as the two grasses.

Figure 1 Regression analyses to determine the effects of neighbor species and neighbor densities on growth parameters of Bromus tectorum (change in height [Δheight], change in tiller number [Δtiller], and aboveground biomass) in two greenhouse studies. ACR, Agropyron cristatum; FK, forage kochia; ELA, Elymus lanceolatus. ANCOVA P-values (for equality of slopes) are also included.

These two greenhouse experiments used different potting media (potting soil in Study 1 and field soil in Study 2). Any differences in plant growth responses between these two studies may be attributed to differences in soil characteristics of these potting media, especially nitrogen availability (Table 1). Overall, the results from the two greenhouse experiments indicate that increasing density of each neighbor species (up to 5 seedlings pot−1) around a B. tectorum seedling reduced B. tectorum seedling growth. However, no mortality of B. tectorum seedlings was observed in any case during this period (8 wk in Study 1 and 13 wk in Study 2) under regular watering conditions. Bromus tectorum has relatively rapid shoot and root growth with many fine rootlets that give it a competitive advantage over slow-growing seedlings of perennial plants (Aguirre and Johnson Reference Aguirre and Johnson1991; Cline et al. Reference Cline, Uresk and Rickard1977; Evans Reference Evans1961; Harris Reference Harris1977). The greater neighbor density likely resulted in more rapid depletion of water and nutrients from the soil compared with when B. tectorum was grown alone. The results of this study indicate that these neighbor species in their initial growth stages slightly reduced B. tectorum seedling growth in the greenhouse. However, established or mature stands of these perennial species may have long-term or even greater ability to suppress B. tectorum seedling growth in field conditions (Reference Buman, Monsen and AbernethyBuman et al. 1998; Humphrey and Schupp Reference Humphrey and Schupp2004; McGlone et al. Reference McGlone, Sieg and Kolb2011). Davies and Johnson (Reference Davies and Johnson2017) reported that established perennial vegetation was effective in limiting reinvasion by exotic annual grasses.

Forage kochia has been considered a candidate for competing with aggressive exotic weeds such as B. tectorum (McArthur et al. Reference McArthur, Blauer and Stevens1990; Monaco Reference Monaco2004; Monaco et al. Reference Monaco, Waldron, Newhall and Horton2003; Stevens et al. Reference Stevens, Jorgensen, McArthur and Davis1985; Young and Clements Reference Young and Clements2004). Forage kochia seedlings can form a small rosette of leaves and accelerate root growth by preferentially partitioning energy into the root system (Harrison et al. Reference Harrison, Chatterton, Waldron, Davenport, Palazzo, Horton and Asay2000), thereby being able to survive in stressful environmental conditions such as weed competition or water stress. The results from the greenhouse studies indicate that presence of forage kochia, even in its seedling stage, tends to negatively affect B. tectorum seedling growth. However, the effect of forage kochia seedlings on B. tectorum was less than that of E. lanceolatus and A. cristatum, likely due to greater interference of the fibrous root system of neighbor grass species compared with the single taproot of forage kochia seedlings. Moreover, relatively small forage kochia seedlings were more likely to be influenced by the shading effect of lateral tillers of B. tectorum (Evans Reference Evans1961). Davies and Johnson (Reference Davies and Johnson2017) also reported that established A. cristatum limited exotic annual grasses more than forage kochia. Previous studies also found that native or nonnative perennial cool-season grasses were effective for B. tectorum control (Davies and Johnson Reference Davies and Johnson2017; Rose et al. Reference Rose, Hild, Whitson, Koch and Tassell2001; Whitson and Koch Reference Whitson and Koch1998). In field conditions near Riverside, WY, Whitson and Koch (Reference Whitson and Koch1998) found that E. lanceolatus was not as effective for B. tectorum control as Hycrest A. cristatum. While aggressive A. cristatum was shown to be strongly competitive against B. tectorum, it also has the tendency to reduce native plant diversity and form monotypic stands (Asay et al. Reference Asay, Horton, Jensen and Palazzo2001; Henderson and Naeth Reference Henderson and Naeth2005; Hull and Klomp Reference Hull and Klomp1967; Nafus et al. Reference Nafus, Svejcar, Ganskopp and Davies2015). In the present greenhouse studies, the overall effects of E. lanceolatus and A. cristatum on B. tectorum seedling growth did not seem to differ from each other.

Native Grass Study

There were no significant (P>0.05) effects of a forage kochia seedling on the growth parameters (change in height, tiller, shoot biomass) of any native species in Study 1 (Figure 2). In Study 2, change in grass height and biomass of P. spicata and only biomass of L. cinereus were reduced when grown with forage kochia, but forage kochia seedlings did not influence the tiller number of any grasses. Overall results indicate that forage kochia seedlings did not interfere with seedling growth of these native perennial grasses during the study period (12 wk in Study 1 and 16 wk in Study 2). Previous reports also support that forage kochia can be sown in a mixture with perennials (Stevens et al. Reference Stevens, Jorgensen, McArthur and Davis1985; Stevens and McArthur Reference Stevens and McArthur1990) and does not preclude reestablishment of native perennials in rangelands (Clements et al. Reference Clements, Gray and Young1997; Harrison et al. Reference Harrison, Chatterton, Waldron, Davenport, Palazzo, Horton and Asay2000). Likewise, forage kochia stands do not appear to reduce the density of established perennial species (Stevens et al. Reference Stevens, Jorgensen, McArthur and Davis1985) and do not demonstrate an invasive nature in perennial plant communities (Harrison et al. Reference Harrison, Chatterton, Waldron, Davenport, Palazzo, Horton and Asay2000, Reference Harrison, Waldron, Jensen, Page, Monaco, Horton and Palazzo2002; Monaco et al. Reference Monaco, Waldron, Newhall and Horton2003; Pendleton et al. Reference Pendleton, Frischknecht and McArthur1992; Waldron et al. Reference Waldron, Eun, ZoBell and Olson2010).

Figure 2 Effects of forage kochia companion on growth parameters of grasses (change in height [Δheight], change in tiller number [Δtiller], and aboveground biomass) in two greenhouse studies. For each native grass species within a study, means (±SEs) with different letters are significantly different (P<0.05). PSP, Pseudoroegneria spicata; LCI, Leymus cinereus; FK, forage kochia; ELA, Elymus lanceolatus; PSM, Pascopyrum smithii.

In Study 1, there were no significant differences in forage kochia change in plant height, branching, and shoot biomass when forage kochia was grown with and without a native perennial grass companion (Figure 3). In Study 2, change in height of forage kochia was significantly lower when grown with each native grass seedling, except P. smithii, and the effects of E. lanceolatus, L. cinereus, and P. spicata on forage kochia height were similar. There was a significant effect of native grass on forage kochia branching. Branching was greatest when forage kochia was grown alone, followed by when it was grown with P. smithii. The other three native grasses drastically reduced the branching of forage kochia. Similarly, forage kochia shoot biomass was also significantly lower when grown with each native grass seedling than when grown alone. All native grasses were similar in reducing forage kochia shoot biomass.

Figure 3 Effects of native grass companion on growth parameters of forage kochia (change in height [Δheight], branching, and aboveground biomass) in two greenhouse studies. Means (±SEs) with different letters within a study are significantly different (P<0.05). PSP, Pseudoroegneria spicata; LCI, Leymus cinereus; FK, forage kochia; ELA, Elymus lanceolatus; PSM, Pascopyrum smithii.

The results from this study indicate that these native grasses negatively affect forage kochia branching and shoot biomass. In general, perennial grasses develop a fibrous root system that is likely able to occupy more soil volume and thus acquire more moisture and nutrients within the pot environments compared with the single slender taproot system of forage kochia in its early growth stage. In the present studies, competition for light was unlikely because of the relatively small seedling size. Although the mechanism of competition was not directly examined, seedlings within each pot were likely competing for nutrients, because the pots were not fertilized during the experiment and watering may have leached existing nutrients from the soil. In a study by Aerts et al. (Reference Aerts, Boot and van der Aart1991), a major proportion of biomass of a perennial grass, moorgrass [Molinia caerulea (L.) Moench], was allocated to its roots, and this extensive root system gave it a competitive advantage over two evergreen shrubs [Calluna vulgaris (L.) Hull and Erica tetralix L.]. According to Li et al. (Reference Li, Sun, Zhang, Guo, Bao, Smith and Smith2006), the extent of root distribution and density of a species influence the ability of other species to take up resources from the soil. Rate of nutrient uptake of a plant can influence its competitive ability in different soil environments (Casper and Jackson Reference Casper and Jackson1997). However, root growth and comparative ability of roots to take up soil moisture or nutrients were not studied in the current experiments. Overall, forage kochia did not appear to compete with native grasses at the seedling stage.

Forage kochia has been considered a potential perennial species to control B. tectorum in semiarid rangelands. The greenhouse studies showed that the seedlings of forage kochia and cool-season grasses have a negative impact on B. tectorum growth parameters, and the presence of high densities of these species increases the negative impact on B. tectorum. The native grass E. lanceolatus in its seedling stage also showed promise for reducing B. tectorum seedling growth. Reduction of forage kochia growth in the presence of native perennial grasses indicates that forage kochia seedlings are unlikely to limit the growth of native seedlings. Although these studies used two types of potting media (greenhouse potting mixture and actual field soil), detailed field experiments should be conducted to better elucidate the effectiveness of forage kochia and E. lanceolatus or other desirable perennial species in annual weed–dominated areas.

Acknowledgments

The project was funded by the University of Wyoming Energy Graduate Assistantships grant program. No conflicts of interest have been declared.

References

Aerts, R, Boot, RGA, van der Aart, PJM (1991) The relation between above- and belowground biomass allocation patterns and competitive ability. Oecologia 87:551559 Google Scholar
Aguirre, L, Johnson, DA (1991) Influence of temperature and cheatgrass competition on seedling development of two bunchgrasses. J Range Manag 44:347354 Google Scholar
Asay, KH, Horton, WH, Jensen, KB, Palazzo, AJ (2001) Merits of native and introduced Triticeae grasses on semiarid rangelands. Can J Plant Sci 81:4552 Google Scholar
Belnap, J, Phillips, SL (2001) Soil biota in an ungrazed grassland: response to annual grass (Bromus tectorum) invasion. Ecol Appl 11:12611275 Google Scholar
Blank, R, Morgan, T (2011) Evidence that invasion by cheatgrass alters soil nitrogen availability. Natural Resources and Environmental Issues 17:14 Google Scholar
Blauer, AC, McArthur, ED, Stevens, R, Nelson, SD (1993) Evaluation of Roadside Stabilization and Beautification Plantings in South-Central Utah. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station Res. Paper INT-462Google Scholar
Bolton, H, Smith, JL, Link, SO (1993) Soil microbial biomass and activity of a disturbed and undisturbed shrub-steppe ecosystem. Soil Biol Biochem 25:545552 Google Scholar
Bradley, BA, Mustard, JF (2005) Identifying land cover variability distinct from land cover change: cheatgrass in the Great Basin. Remote Sens Environ 94:204213 Google Scholar
Brandt, CA, Rickard, WH (1994) Alien taxa in the North American shrub-steppe four decades after cessation of livestock grazing and cultivation agriculture. Biol Conserv 68:95105 Google Scholar
Brooks, ML, D’Antonio, CM, Richardson, DM, Grace, JB, Keeley, JE, Ditomaso, JM, Hobbs, RJ, Pellant, M, Pyke, D (2004) Effects of invasive alien plants on fire regimes. BioScience 54:677688 Google Scholar
Brooks, ML, Pyke, DA (2001) Invasive plants and fire in the deserts of North America. Pages 114 in Galley KEM, Wilson TP, eds. Proceedings of the Invasive Species Workshop: The Role of Fire in the Control and Spread of Invasive Species. First National Congress on Fire Ecology, Prevention, and Management. Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee, FL: Miscellaneous Publication No. 11 Google Scholar
Buman, RA, Monsen, SB, Abernethy, RH (1988) Seedling competition between mountain rye, “Hycrest” crested wheatgrass, and downy brome. J Range Manag 41:3034 Google Scholar
Casper, BB, Jackson, RB (1997) Plant competition underground. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 28:545570 Google Scholar
Clements, CD, Gray, KJ, Young, JA (1997) Forage kochia: to seed or not to seed. Rangelands 19:2931 Google Scholar
Cline, FJ, Uresk, DW, Rickard, WH (1977) Comparison of soil water used by a sagebrush-bunchgrass and a cheatgrass community. J Range Manag 30:199201 Google Scholar
Copeland, HE, Pocewicz, A, Kiesecker, JM (2011) Geography of energy development in Western North America: potential impacts on terrestrial ecosystems. Pages 722 in Naugle DE, ed. Energy Development and Wildlife Conservation in Western North America. Washington, DC: Island Press Google Scholar
Cronin, EH, Williams, MC (1966) Principles for managing ranges infested with halogeton. J Range Manag 19:226227 Google Scholar
Davies, KW, Johnson, DD (2017) Established perennial vegetation provides high resistance to reinvasion by exotic annual grasses. Rangeland Ecol Manag 70:748754 Google Scholar
Evans, RA (1961) Effects of different densities of downy brome (Bromus tectorum) on growth and survival of crested wheatgrass (Agropyron desertorum) in the greenhouse. Weeds 9:216223 Google Scholar
Gibson, DJ, Connolly, J, Hartnett, DC, Weidenhamer, JD (1999) Designs for greenhouse studies of interactions between plants. J Ecol 87:116 Google Scholar
Goldberg, DE, Fleetwood, L (1987) Competitive effect and response in four annual plants. J Ecol 75:11311143 Google Scholar
Gray, EC, Muir, PS (2013) Does Kochia prostrata spread from seeded sites? An evaluation from southwestern Idaho, USA. Rangeland Ecol Manag 66:191203 Google Scholar
Harris, GA (1977) Root phenology as a factor of competition among grass seedlings. J Range Manage 30:172176 Google Scholar
Harrison, RD, Chatterton, NJ, Waldron, BL, Davenport, BW, Palazzo, AJ, Horton, WH, Asay, KH (2000) Forage kochia: its compatibility and potential aggressiveness on intermountain rangelands. Logan, UT: Utah State University, Utah Agricultural Experiment Station Res Rep 162. 66 pGoogle Scholar
Harrison, RD, Waldron, BL, Jensen, KB, Page, R, Monaco, TA, Horton, WH, Palazzo, AJ (2002) Forage kochia helps fight range fires. Rangelands 24:37 Google Scholar
Henderson, DC, Naeth, MA (2005) Multi-scale impacts of crested wheatgrass invasion in mixed-grass prairie. Biol Invasions 7:639650 Google Scholar
Hulbert, LC (1955) Ecological studies of Bromus tectorum and other annual bromegrasses. Ecol Monogr 25:181213 Google Scholar
Hull, AC, Klomp, GJ (1967) Thickening and spread of crested wheatgrass stands on southern Idaho ranges. J Range Manage 20:222227 Google Scholar
Humphrey, LD, Schupp, EW (2004) Competition as a barrier to establishment of a native perennial grass (Elymus elymoides) in alien annual grass (Bromus tectorum) communities. J Arid Environ 58:405422 Google Scholar
Keller, W, Bleak, AT (1974) Kochia prostrata: a shrub for western ranges? Utah Sci 35:2425 Google Scholar
Knapp, PA (1996) Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L.) dominance in the Great Basin desert: history, persistence, and influences to human activities. Glob Environ Chang 6:3752 Google Scholar
Koch, DW, Asay, W (2001) Forage Kochia: A Forage with Fall and Winter Grazing Potential. University of Wyoming Cooperative Extension Service B-1122.5 Google Scholar
Levine, JM, Vila, M, D’Antonio, C, Dukes, JS, Grigulis, K, Lavorel, S (2003) Mechanisms underlying the impact of exotic plant invasions. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:775781 Google Scholar
Li, L, Sun, JH, Zhang, FS, Guo, TW, Bao, XG, Smith, FA, Smith, SE (2006) Root distribution and interactions between intercropped species. Oecologia 147:280290 Google Scholar
Lowe, PN, Lauenroth, WK, Burke, IC (2003) Effects of nitrogen availability on competition between Bromus tectorum and Bouteloua gracilis . Plant Ecol 167:247254 Google Scholar
Mack, RN (2011) Fifty years of “waging war on cheatgrass,” research advances, while meaningful control languishes. Pages 253265 in Richardson DM, ed. Fifty Years of Invasion Ecology: The Legacy of Charles Elton. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell Google Scholar
McArthur, ED, Blauer, AC, Stevens, R (1990) Forage kochia competition with cheatgrass in central Utah. Pages 56–65 in McArthur ED, Romney EM, Smith SD, Tueller PT, eds. Proceedings of Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die-Off, and Other Aspects of Shrub Biology and Management. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report INT-276Google Scholar
McArthur, ED, Guinta, BC, Plummer, AP (1974) Shrubs for restoration of depleted ranges and disturbed areas. Utah Sci 35:2833 Google Scholar
McGlone, C, Sieg, C, Kolb, T (2011) Invasion resistance and persistence: established plants win, even with disturbance and high propagule pressure. Biol Invasions 13:291304 Google Scholar
Menalled, F, Mangold, J, Davis, E (2008) Cheatgrass: Identification, Biology and Integrated Management. Montana State University Extension. http://ipm.montana.edu/documents/Cheatgrass.pdf. Accessed: July 10, 2018Google Scholar
Monaco, TA (2004) Photosynthesis and water relations of the salt desert shrub Kochia prostrata. Pages 19–21 in Proceedings—Forage Kochia Workshop and Tour. Logan, UT, November 9–10, 2004Google Scholar
Monaco, TA, Waldron, BL, Newhall, RL, Horton, WH (2003) Re-establishing perennial vegetation in cheatgrass monocultures. Rangelands 25: 2629 Google Scholar
Monsen, SB (1994) Selection of plants for fire suppression on semiarid sites. Pages 363–373 in Monsen SB, Kitchen SG, compilers, Proceedings: Ecology and Management of Annual Rangelands. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report INT-GTR-313Google Scholar
Monsen, SB, Turnipseed, D (1990) Seeding forage kochia onto cheatgrass-infested rangelands. Pages 66–71 in McArthur ED, Romney EM, Smith SD, Tueller PT, eds. Proceedings of Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die-Off, and Other Aspects of Shrub Biology and Management. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report INT-276Google Scholar
Nafus, AM, Svejcar, TJ, Ganskopp, DC, Davies, KW (2015) Abundances of coplanted native bunchgrasses and crested wheatgrass after 13 Years. Rangeland Ecol Manage 68: 211214 Google Scholar
O’Connor, TG (1991) Local extinction in perennial grasslands: a life-history approach. Am Nat 137:753773 Google Scholar
Pellant, M (1990) The cheatgrass–wildfire cycle–are there any solutions? Pages 11–18 in McArthur ED, Romney EM, Smith SD, Tueller PT, eds. Proceedings of Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die-Off, and Other Aspects of Shrub Biology and Management. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report INT-276Google Scholar
Pendleton, RL, Frischknecht, NC, McArthur, ED (1992) Long-Term Survival of 20 Selected Plant Accessions in a Rush Valley, Utah, Planting. Ogden, UT: USDA, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station Research Note INT-403. 7 pGoogle Scholar
Pyke, DA (1999) Invasive exotic plants in sagebrush ecosystems of the Intermountain West. Pages 4354 in Entwistle PG, Debolt AM, Kaltenecker JH, Steenhof K, eds. Proceedings: Sagebrush Steppe Ecosystems Symposium, June 21–23, 1999. Boise, ID: Boise State University Google Scholar
Rees, M, Condit, R, Crawley, M, Pacala, S, Tilman, D (2001) Long-term studies of vegetation dynamics. Science 293:650655 Google Scholar
Rose, KK, Hild, AL, Whitson, TD, Koch, DW, Tassell, LV (2001) Competitive effects of cool-season grasses on re-establishment of three weed species. Weed Technol 15:885891 Google Scholar
SAS Institute (2014) SAS for Windows. Release Version 9.4. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Google Scholar
Stevens, R, Jorgensen, KR, McArthur, ED, Davis, JN (1985) ‘Immigrant’ forage kochia. Rangelands 7:2223 Google Scholar
Stevens, R, McArthur, ED (1990) ‘Immigrant’ forage kochia competition with halogeton following various seeding techniques. Pp 175–180 in McArthur ED, Romney EM, Smith SD, Tueller PT, eds. Proceedings of Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die-Off, and Other Aspects of Shrub Biology and Management. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report INT-276Google Scholar
Stewart, G, Hull, AC (1949) Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L.): an ecological intruder in southern Idaho. Ecology 30:5874 Google Scholar
Sullivan, TA, Anderson, VJ, Fugal, AR (2013) Kochia prostrata establishment with pre-seeding disturbance in three plant communities. Int Res J Agric Sci Soil Sci 3:353361 Google Scholar
Thompson, TW, Roundy, BA, McArthur, ED, Jessop, BD, Waldron, B, Davis, JN (2006) Fire rehabilitation using native and introduced species: A landscape trial. Rangeland Ecol Manag 59:237248 Google Scholar
Waldron, BL, Eun, JS, ZoBell, DR, Olson, KC (2010) Forage kochia (Kochia prostrata) for fall and winter grazing. Small Ruminant Res 91:4755 Google Scholar
Whitson, TD, Koch, DW (1998) Control of downy brome (Bromus tectorum) with herbicides and perennial grass competition. Weed Technol 12:391396 Google Scholar
Young, JA, Clements, CD (2004) The place of forage kochia in rangeland environments. Pages 14–15 in Proceedings—Forage Kochia Workshop and Tour. Logan, UT, November 9–10, 2004Google Scholar
Young, JA, Evans, RA (1978) Population dynamics after wildfires in sagebrush grasslands. J Range Manage 31:283289 Google Scholar
Young, JA, Evans, RA, Eckert, RE (1969) Population dynamics of downy brome. Weed Sci 17:2026 Google Scholar
Young, JA, Evans, RA, Eckert, RE, Kay, BL (1987) Cheatgrass. Rangelands 9:266270 Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1 Properties of potting media used in greenhouse experiments.

Figure 1

Figure 1 Regression analyses to determine the effects of neighbor species and neighbor densities on growth parameters of Bromus tectorum (change in height [Δheight], change in tiller number [Δtiller], and aboveground biomass) in two greenhouse studies. ACR, Agropyron cristatum; FK, forage kochia; ELA, Elymus lanceolatus. ANCOVA P-values (for equality of slopes) are also included.

Figure 2

Figure 2 Effects of forage kochia companion on growth parameters of grasses (change in height [Δheight], change in tiller number [Δtiller], and aboveground biomass) in two greenhouse studies. For each native grass species within a study, means (±SEs) with different letters are significantly different (P<0.05). PSP, Pseudoroegneria spicata; LCI, Leymus cinereus; FK, forage kochia; ELA, Elymus lanceolatus; PSM, Pascopyrum smithii.

Figure 3

Figure 3 Effects of native grass companion on growth parameters of forage kochia (change in height [Δheight], branching, and aboveground biomass) in two greenhouse studies. Means (±SEs) with different letters within a study are significantly different (P<0.05). PSP, Pseudoroegneria spicata; LCI, Leymus cinereus; FK, forage kochia; ELA, Elymus lanceolatus; PSM, Pascopyrum smithii.