Lindenmayer David B, Wood Jeff, MacGregor Christopher, Buckley Yvonne M, Dexter Nicholas, Fortescue Martin, Hobbs Richard J, Catford Jane A
Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia; ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia; National Environmental Research Program, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia; Long-term Ecological Research Network, Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia; ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia; National Environmental Research Program, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 3;10(6):e0128482. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128482. eCollection 2015.
Invasive plant management is often justified in terms of conservation goals, yet progress is rarely assessed against these broader goals, instead focussing on short-term reductions of the invader as a measure of success. Key questions commonly remain unanswered including whether invader removal reverses invader impacts and whether management itself has negative ecosystem impacts. We addressed these knowledge gaps using a seven year experimental investigation of Bitou Bush, Chrysanthemoides monilifera subsp. rotundata. Our case study took advantage of the realities of applied management interventions for Bitou Bush to assess whether it is a driver or passenger of environmental change, and quantified conservation benefits relative to management costs of different treatment regimes. Among treatments examined, spraying with herbicide followed by burning and subsequent re-spraying (spray-fire-spray) proved the most effective for reducing the number of individuals and cover of Bitou Bush. Other treatment regimes (e.g. fire followed by spraying, or two fires in succession) were less effective or even exacerbated Bitou Bush invasion. The spray-fire-spray regime did not increase susceptibility of treated areas to re-invasion by Bitou Bush or other exotic species. This regime significantly reduced plant species richness and cover, but these effects were short-lived. The spray-fire-spray regime was the most cost-effective approach to controlling a highly invasive species and facilitating restoration of native plant species richness to levels characteristic of uninvaded sites. We provide a decision tree to guide management, where recommended actions depend on the outcome of post-treatment monitoring and performance against objectives. Critical to success is avoiding partial treatments and treatment sequences that may exacerbate invasive species impacts. We also show the value of taking advantage of unplanned events, such as wildfires, to achieve management objectives at reduced cost.
入侵植物管理通常以保护目标为依据,但很少根据这些更广泛的目标来评估进展情况,而是侧重于短期内减少入侵者数量作为成功的衡量标准。一些关键问题通常仍未得到解答,包括清除入侵者是否能扭转其影响,以及管理本身是否会对生态系统产生负面影响。我们通过对圆叶金菊(Chrysanthemoides monilifera subsp. rotundata)进行为期七年的实验研究,填补了这些知识空白。我们的案例研究利用了针对圆叶金菊的实际管理干预措施,以评估它是环境变化的驱动因素还是被动因素,并量化了相对于不同处理方式的管理成本而言的保护效益。在所研究的处理方式中,先喷洒除草剂,然后焚烧,随后再次喷洒(喷 - 火 - 喷)被证明是减少圆叶金菊个体数量和覆盖面积最有效的方法。其他处理方式(如先焚烧后喷洒,或连续两次焚烧)效果较差,甚至加剧了圆叶金菊的入侵。喷 - 火 - 喷处理方式并没有增加处理区域对圆叶金菊或其他外来物种再次入侵的敏感性。这种处理方式显著降低了植物物种丰富度和覆盖面积,但这些影响是短暂的。喷 - 火 - 喷处理方式是控制高度入侵物种并促进本地植物物种丰富度恢复到未受入侵地点特征水平的最具成本效益的方法。我们提供了一个决策树来指导管理,其中推荐的行动取决于处理后监测的结果以及相对于目标的表现。成功的关键在于避免可能加剧入侵物种影响的部分处理和处理顺序。我们还展示了利用野火等意外事件以降低成本实现管理目标的价值。