東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Examinations of the Ecology, Managem...

Wolf, Kristina Michelle.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Examinations of the Ecology, Management, and Restoration of Rangeland Ecosystems.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Examinations of the Ecology, Management, and Restoration of Rangeland Ecosystems./
作者:	Wolf, Kristina Michelle.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2016,
面頁冊數:	215 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 78-03(E), Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International78-03B(E).
標題:	Ecology. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10165901
ISBN:	9781369202779

Examinations of the Ecology, Management, and Restoration of Rangeland Ecosystems.
Wolf, Kristina Michelle.

Examinations of the Ecology, Management, and Restoration of Rangeland Ecosystems. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2016 - 215 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 78-03(E), Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of California, Davis, 2016.

Rangeland ecosystems, and grasslands in particular, are one of the most threatened ecosystems worldwide. Grasslands are primarily utilized for the production of food and fiber via livestock grazing, and conservation of the flora and fauna found in grasslands is complicated by weed invasions, economic and social considerations, habitat destruction and fragmentation, climate change, and inherent inter- and intra-annual climatic variability. The outcomes of many restoration and management practices are not always well understood or predictable. For example, many common restoration practices, like flushing the weed seed bank, have not been validated by experimental evidence. Often restoration methods that had high success in one year and setting fail to produce similar results in a different year and setting.

ISBN: 9781369202779Subjects--Topical Terms:

516476
Ecology.

Examinations of the Ecology, Management, and Restoration of Rangeland Ecosystems.
LDR:05506nmm a2200337 4500 001 2120977
005 20170724102934.5
008 180830s2016 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781369202779
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10165901
035 $a AAI10165901
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Wolf, Kristina Michelle. $3 3282956
245 1 0 $a Examinations of the Ecology, Management, and Restoration of Rangeland Ecosystems.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2016
300 $a 215 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 78-03(E), Section: B.
500 $a Adviser: Truman P. Young.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of California, Davis, 2016.
520 $a Rangeland ecosystems, and grasslands in particular, are one of the most threatened ecosystems worldwide. Grasslands are primarily utilized for the production of food and fiber via livestock grazing, and conservation of the flora and fauna found in grasslands is complicated by weed invasions, economic and social considerations, habitat destruction and fragmentation, climate change, and inherent inter- and intra-annual climatic variability. The outcomes of many restoration and management practices are not always well understood or predictable. For example, many common restoration practices, like flushing the weed seed bank, have not been validated by experimental evidence. Often restoration methods that had high success in one year and setting fail to produce similar results in a different year and setting.
520 $a Chapter One focuses on a common practice in pre-restoration settings, in which water is applied to flush weeds, after which they are killed by a variety of possible methods. While this has not been fully investigated in a pre-restoration setting, the consequences of this type of weed management tactic are even less clear in a post-restoration setting. Other studies have investigated the result of very limited flushing (very few seedlings germinated) in a post-restoration setting, but only in the very short-term, stopping after the start of ambient rainfall. Thus, it was not clear whether this method for the post-restoration management of weeds -- particularly in settings where use of herbicides, mowing, grazing, and burning are restricted -- would effectively reduce annual grass weed pressure in the longer-term through the following growing season. We investigated the use of targeted watering in California's long and dry summer season to flush exotic annual grasses, followed by death by desiccation, to determine if this practice could produce a substantial annual grass weed flush, provide a competitive edge to native perennial grasses, reduce the annual grass seed bank, and reduce overall exotic annual grass cover in the following growing season, and benefit native perennial grasses in the following year.
520 $a In Chapter Two we shift focus to grazing management in grasslands, and in particular, focus on the ongoing debate regarding the efficacy of rotational and continuous grazing management systems. In their pivotal paper "Rotational Grazing on Rangelands: Reconciliation of Perception and Experimental Evidence," Briske et al. (2008) concluded that continued recommendations promoting the use of rotational grazing practices as being superior to continuous grazing practices were based primarily on anecdotal evidence, and not on the bulk of scientific evidence. However, this conclusion is limited by use of a relatively low-power vote-counting method of analysis which does not take into consideration other potentially influential factors, such as climate or scale of study, nor does it provide quantitative estimates of effects. We conducted a quantitative meta-analysis incorporating sixteen predictor variables to assess the relative performance of rotational to continuous grazing practices across the same set of studies used by Briske et al. (2008) in order to better elucidate the circumstances under which one grazing practice might be expected to produce superior results compared to the other.
520 $a Finally, in Chapter Three we shift gears to investigate the responses of wildlife to grassland restoration. While restoration is often assumed to be beneficial for wildlife, and native wildlife in particular, very few studies have investigated the responses of wildlife to restoration at large scales for a suite of species or guilds, especially in the Central Valley of California. We monitored rodent, snake, and diurnal raptor activity and species richness for up to four seasons in paired unrestored exotic annual grasslands and restored native perennial grasslands at four locations in the Yolo and Sacramento counties from 2014--2015. We also monitored vegetation structure and cover to investigate localized responses to vegetation parameters, such as height, bare ground, litter, and native and exotic cover. We used wildlife activity as an index of wildlife abundance, comparing relative abundance between unrestored and restored grasslands within locations. Such information will assist land managers and wildlife biologists in predicting responses of these wildlife groups to different management practices that alter vegetative composition and structure.
590 $a School code: 0029.
650 4 $a Ecology. $3 516476
650 4 $a Natural resource management. $3 589570
650 4 $a Range management. $3 647222
690 $a 0329
690 $a 0528
690 $a 0777
710 2 $a University of California, Davis. $b Ecology. $3 1678659
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 78-03B(E).
790 $a 0029
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2016
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10165901