Bunchgrass Ridge

Restoration of montane meadows in western Oregon:
Research and adaptive management

     
Home > Research > 3. Effects of gophers > Results
     
3. Effects of gopher mounds on community structure
 
Home
Study area
Research
 
1. Conifer invasion
2. Vegetation responses
 
3. Effects of gophers
 
  Introduction
  Methods
> Results
  Conclusions
 
4. Restoration experiment
Education
Outreach
Products
Participants
Key findings
   
 
Hosted by
UW link
Privacy | Terms
 
Results  
Q1. How do plant cover and species diversity change as mounds undergo succession?

Total plant cover (figure, right: top panel) and species richness (figure, right: bottom panel) increased with mound age, but old mounds had lower cover and were less diverse than adjacent meadow.

Q2. Does gopher activity shift the relative abundance of grasses vs. forbs? Does this relationship change as mounds undergo succession?

Relative to graminoids, forbs benefited from mound formation, but this advantage declined over time (figure, right: top right panel).

Q3. Are communities of species on mounds more heterogeneous (variable) in composition than those in adjacent meadows? Does this variability decline as mounds succeed to meadow?

At both spatial scales (within and among plots), heterogeneity (variability) of species composition was greatest for young mounds and declined with age.

Changes in heterogeneity as mounds undergo succession
Changes in heterogeneity at two scales (within plots and among plots), as mounds undergo succession. The p-value for within plot data is from one-way ANOVA; letters denote significant differences among age classes. Significance was not tested among plots due to non-independence of comparisons.
Changes in cover as mounds undergo succession
Changes in plant cover as mounds undergo succession. P-values are from one-way ANOVA; letters denote significant differences among age classes.
Changes in richness as mounds undergo succession
Changes in species richness at two scales (quadrats and plots), as mounds undergo succession. P-values are from one-way ANOVA; letters denote significant differences among age classes.
 
Q4. Do mounds provide germination sites for species that are absent from, or uncommon in, undisturbed meadow?

In total, 34 species were observed among the 74 plots. All species were found in meadow and 28 in mound plots. The six species unique to meadow were uncommon.

Thus, mounds did not support “fugitive” species that were absent from undisturbed meadow. This is surprising given the abundance of ruderal species, typically dependent on soil disturbance, in the soil seed bank (see seed bank study).

 
Previous page Methods Conclusions Next page