Overflow
Scenario model
Current ecosystem state
Select a state
Management practices/drivers
Select a transition or restoration pathway
- Transition T1a More details
- Transition T1b More details
- Transition T5 More details
- Transition T5 More details
- Transition T5 More details
- Transition T3b More details
- Transition T3a More details
- Restoration pathway R4 More details
-
No transition or restoration pathway between the selected states has been described
Target ecosystem state
Select a state
Description
This state description represents the natural range of variability that dominated the dynamics of this ecological site. This state was typically dominated by warm-season grasses, with occasional shifts to a near co-dominance of cool- and warm-season grasses. In pre-European times, the primary disturbance mechanisms for this site in the reference condition included periods of below and/or above average precipitation, periodic fire, and herbivory by insects and large ungulates. Timing of fires and herbivory coupled with weather events dictated the dynamics that occurred within the natural range of variability. A combination of disturbances would likely have caused a shift to more cool-season grasses with a corresponding decrease in tall warm-season grasses. An increase in fire frequency or fire followed by occasional grazing would have caused an increase in warm-season grasses.
Submodel
Description
This state represents the more common range of variability that exists with higher levels of grazing management but in the absence of periodic fire due to fire suppression. This state is dominated by cool- and warm-season grasses. It can be found on areas that are properly managed with grazing and/or prescribed burning, and sometimes on areas receiving occasional short periods of rest. Taller grass species can decline and a corresponding increase in short statured grass will occur.
Submodel
Description
This state is the result of invasion and dominance of introduced species. This state is characterized by the dominance of Kentucky bluegrass and smooth bromegrass, and an increasing thatch layer that effectively blocks introduction of other plants into the system. Plant litter accumulation tends to favor the more shade tolerant introduced grass species. The nutrient cycle is also impaired, and the result is typically a higher level of nitrogen which also favors the introduced species. Increasing plant litter decreases the amount of sunlight reaching plant crowns thereby shifting competitive advantage to shade tolerant introduced grass species. Studies indicate that soil biological activity is altered, and this shift apparently exploits the soil microclimate and encourages growth of the introduced grass species. Once the threshold is crossed, a change in grazing management alone cannot cause a reduction in the invasive grass dominance. Preliminary studies would tend to indicate this threshold may exist when Kentucky bluegrass exceeds 30% of the plant community and native grasses represent less than 40% of the plant community composition.
Once the state is well established, even drastic events such as high intensity fires driven by high fuel loads of litter and thatch will not result in more than a very short term reduction of Kentucky bluegrass. These events may reduce the dominance of Kentucky bluegrass, but due to the large amount of rhizomes in the soil there is no opportunity for the native species to establish and dominate before Kentucky bluegrass rebounds and again dominates the system.
Submodel
Mechanism
Heavy continuous grazing (stocking levels well above carrying capacity for extended portions of the growing season, and often at the same time of year each year, typically beginning early in the season) would have converted this plant community to the 2.1 Sedge/Grama/Western Wheatgrass Plant Community Phase and the Shortgrass Sod State (State 2).
Mechanism
Encroachment of non-native grasses such as Kentucky bluegrass and smooth bromegrass, and disruption of natural disturbance regimes (typically as a result of fire suppression following settlement led this state over a threshold to the Native/Invaded Grass State (State 3).
Mechanism
Encroachment of non-native invasive/noxious species, abandonment of cropping, or seeding of introduced and/or native improved varieties of forage species may lead this plant community phase over a threshold to the Invaded State (State 4) and more specifically to the 4.3 Annual/Pioneer, Non-native Perennial Plant Community Phase. In the case of a seeding, refer to the corresponding Forage Suitability Group description for adapted species and expected production (production estimates in the Forage Suitability Group description may be unrealistically high due to the degraded condition of the site at this phase).
Mechanism
Encroachment of non-native invasive/noxious species, abandonment of cropping, or seeding of introduced and/or native improved varieties of forage species may lead this plant community phase over a threshold to the Invaded State (State 4) and more specifically to the 4.3 Annual/Pioneer, Non-native Perennial Plant Community Phase. In the case of a seeding, refer to the corresponding Forage Suitability Group description for adapted species and expected production (production estimates in the Forage Suitability Group description may be unrealistically high due to the degraded condition of the site at this phase).
Mechanism
Encroachment of non-native invasive/noxious species, abandonment of cropping, or seeding of introduced and/or native improved varieties of forage species may lead this plant community phase over a threshold to the Invaded State (State 4) and more specifically to the 4.3 Annual/Pioneer, Non-native Perennial Plant Community Phase. In the case of a seeding, refer to the corresponding Forage Suitability Group description for adapted species and expected production (production estimates in the Forage Suitability Group description may be unrealistically high due to the degraded condition of the site at this phase).
Mechanism
Heavy continuous seasonal grazing (stocking levels well above carrying capacity for extended portions of the growing season, and at the same time of year each year, typically beginning early in the season) will cause a shift across a threshold leading to the 4.2 Kentucky Bluegrass/Sedge Plant Community Phase within the Invaded State (State 4).
Mechanism
Non-use and no fire for extended periods of time (typically for 10 or more years) will likely lead this state over a threshold resulting in the 4.1 Smooth Bromegrass/Kentucky Bluegrass Plant Community Phase within the Invaded State (State 4).
Mechanism
Long-term prescribed grazing (moderate stocking levels coupled with adequate recovery periods, or other grazing systems such as high-density, low-frequency intended to treat specific species dominance, or periodic light to moderate stocking levels possibly including periodic rest) may lead this plant community phase over a threshold to the Native/Invaded Grass State (State 3). Pest management (i.e., herbicide) may also be needed to suppress cool-season invasive grasses. This will likely take a long period of time, possibly up to 10 years or more, and recovery may not be attainable. Success depends on whether native reproductive propagules remain intact on the site.
Relevant conservation practices
Practice | External resources |
---|---|
Prescribed Grazing |
|
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) |
Model keys
Briefcase
Add ecological sites and Major Land Resource Areas to your briefcase by clicking on the briefcase () icon wherever it occurs. Drag and drop items to reorder. Cookies are used to store briefcase items between browsing sessions. Because of this, the number of items that can be added to your briefcase is limited, and briefcase items added on one device and browser cannot be accessed from another device or browser. Users who do not wish to place cookies on their devices should not use the briefcase tool. Briefcase cookies serve no other purpose than described here and are deleted whenever browsing history is cleared.
Ecological sites
Major Land Resource Areas
The Ecosystem Dynamics Interpretive Tool is an information system framework developed by the USDA-ARS Jornada Experimental Range, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, and New Mexico State University.