Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-frp75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T21:07:12.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparisons of Sites Infested and Not Infested with Saltcedar (Tamarix pentandra) and Russian Olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

John G. Carman  and
Jack D. Brotherson
John G. Carman
Affiliation:
Dep. Bot. and Range Sci., Brigham Young Univ., Provo, UT 84602
Jack D. Brotherson
Affiliation:
Dep. Bot. and Range Sci., Brigham Young Univ., Provo, UT 84602
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Saltcedar (Tamarix pentandra Pall.) and Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia L.) invade moist pastures and rangeland and cause serious forage-production and soil-water losses. Our objective was to develop criteria for classifying sites relative to the likelihood of infestation by saltcedar and Russian olive, based on comparisons of soil and vegetation characteristics of infested and adjacent uninfested sites. Discriminant analyses indicated that Russian olive occurs on soils with low to medium concentrations of soluble salts (100–3500 ppm), whereas saltcedar occurs on soils with much higher soluble salt concentrations (700–15000 ppm). Characteristics of the herbaceous vegetation on sites infested with saltcedar or Russian olive differed distinctly from each other and from adjacent, uninfested sites. Frequency of occurrence of certain herbaceous understory species provided the most accurate basis for discrimination of infested and uninfested areas. Discriminant analysis may be of value in the development of infestation-proneness indices.

Keywords

Comparative ecologyphreatophytewoody invaders

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , July 1982 , pp. 360 - 364
Copyright
Copyright © 1982 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

1. Bouyoucos, G. J. 1951. A recalibration of the hydrometer method for making mechanical analysis of soils. Agron. J. 43:434–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Christensen, E. M. 1962. The rate of naturalization of Tamirix in Utah. Am. Midl. Nat. 68:51–57.Google Scholar
3. Christensen, E. M. 1963. Naturalization of Russian-olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia L.) in Utah. Am. Midl. Nat. 70:133–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Daubenmire, R. 1959. A canopy-coverage method of vegetational analysis. Northwest Sci. 33:43–46.Google Scholar
5. Gambi, G. 1972. Possible use of Elaeagnus angustifolia for reforestation of coastal sandy soils and of anomalous soils. Ann. 1st. Sper. Selvic. 3:51–59.Google Scholar
6. Horton, J. S. 1964. Notes on the introduction of deciduous Tamarisk. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Ser. Res. Note RM-16. 7 pp.Google Scholar
7. Horton, J. S. and Campbell, C. J. 1974. Management of phreatophyte and riparian vegetation for maximum multiple use values. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Ser. Res. Paper RM-117. 23 pp.Google Scholar
8. Horton, J. S., Mounts, F. C., and Kraft, J. M. 1960. Seed germination and seedling establishment of phreatophyte species. U.S. Dep. Agric. Ser. Stn. Paper No. 48. 26 pp.Google Scholar
9. Jackson, M. L. 1958. Soil Chemicals Analysis. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 498 pp.Google Scholar
10. Khudaiberdyey, S. B. 1973. Experience of marine decalcified shell sands stabilization in Bekdash. Probl. Osvoeniya Pustyn 5:64–66.Google Scholar
11. Klecka, W. A. 1975. Discriminant analysis. In Nie, H. H., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K., and Bent, D. H., eds. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
12. Nasyrov, R. G. 1973. Vascular plants new to the Azores and to individual islands in the archipelago. Bol. Masea Minicipal Funchan 27:94–118.Google Scholar
13. Russell, D. A. 1948. A Laboratory Manual for Soil Fertility Students, 3rd edition. Wm. Brown Co., Dubuque, IA. 56 pp.Google Scholar
14. Swenson, J. L., Archer, W. M., Donaldson, K. M., Shiozaki, J. J., Broderick, J. H., and Woodward, L. 1972. Soil survey of Utah County, Utah. U.S. Dep. Agric., Soil Conservation Serv. 161 pp.Google Scholar