Wet Upland Sedge Meadow
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 T1C More details
- Transition T2A More details
- Transition T2B More details
- Transition R2A More details
- Restoration pathway T3A More details
- Transition T3B More details
- Transition R3A More details
- Restoration pathway T4A More details
- Restoration pathway T4B More details
- Transition R4A More details
- Restoration pathway T5A More details
- Restoration pathway T5B More details
- Restoration pathway T5C More details
-
No transition or restoration pathway between the selected states has been described
Target ecosystem state
Select a state
Description
The reference plant community is categorized as a wet-mesic sedge meadow community, dominated by herbaceous vegetation. The two community phases within the reference state are dependent on periodic fire and herbivory. Episodic grazing alters species composition, cover, and extent, while regular fire intervals recycle nutrients, encourage flowering and seed production, and keep woody species from dominating (MDNR 2005). Drought has a more localized impact in the reference phases, but does contribute to overall species composition, diversity, cover, and productivity.
Submodel
Description
Hydrology is the most important determinant of wetlands and wetland processes. Hydrology modifies and determines the physiochemical environment (i.e., sediments, soil chemistry, water chemistry) which in turn directly affects the vegetation, animals, and microbes (Mitsch and Gosselink 2007). Human activities on landscape hydrology have greatly altered Wet Upland Sedge Meadows. Alterations such as agricultural tile draining and conversion to cropland on adjacent lands have changed the natural hydroperiod and rate of sedimentation as well as increased nutrient pollution (Mitsch and Gosselink 2007; Eggers and Reed 2015).
Submodel
Description
The forage state arises when the site is converted to a farming system that emphasizes domestic livestock production, known as grassland agriculture. Fire suppression, periodic cultural treatments (e.g., clipping, drainage, soil amendment applications, planting new species and/or cultivars, mechanical harvesting) and grazing by domesticated livestock transition and maintain this state (USDA-NRCS 2003). Early settlers seeded non-native species, as smooth brome (Bromus inermis Leyss.) and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.), to help extend the grazing season (Smith 1998). Over time, as lands were continuously harvested or grazed by herds of cattle, these species were able to spread and expand across the prairie ecosystem, reducing the native species diversity and ecological function.
Submodel
Description
The low topographic relief across the MLRA has resulted in nearly the entire area being converted to agriculture (Eilers and Roosa 1994). Agricultural tile drains used to lower the water table and the continuous use of tillage, row-crop planting, and chemicals (i.e., herbicides, fertilizers, etc.) have effectively eliminated the reference community and many of its natural ecological functions in favor of crop production. Corn and soybeans are the dominant crops for the site, and oats (Avena L.) and alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) may be rotated periodically. These areas are likely to remain in crop production for the foreseeable future.
Submodel
Description
Sedge Meadow habitats provide multiple ecosystem services including flood abatement, water quality improvement, and biodiversity support (Mitsch and Gosselink 2007). However, many sedge meadow communities have been eliminated as a result of type conversions to agricultural production, wildfire suppression, changes to the natural hydrologic regime, and invasion of non-native species, thereby significantly reducing these services (Annen et al. 2008). The extensive alterations of lands adjacent to Wet Upland Sedge Meadows may not allow for restoration back to the historic reference condition. But ecological reconstruction can aim to aid the recovery of degraded, damaged, or destroyed functions. A successful reconstruction will have the ability to structurally and functionally sustain itself, demonstrate resilience to the natural ranges of stress and disturbance, and create and maintain positive biotic and abiotic interactions (SER 2002; Mitsch and Jørgensen 2004).
Submodel
Mechanism
Cultural treatments are implemented to increase forage quality and yield
Mechanism
Agricultural conversion via tillage, seeding and non-selective herbicide
Mechanism
Cultural treatments are implemented to increase forage quality and yield
Mechanism
Agricultural conversion via tillage, seeding and non-selective herbicide
Mechanism
Site preparation, non-native species control and native seeding
Mechanism
Changes to natural hydroperiod and/or land abandonment
Mechanism
Agricultural conversion via tillage, seeding and non-selective herbicide
Mechanism
Site preparation, non-native species control and native seeding
Mechanism
Changes to natural hydroperiod and/or land abandonment
Mechanism
Cultural treatments are implemented to increase forage quality and yield
Mechanism
Site preparation, non-native species control and native seeding
Mechanism
Changes to natural hydroperiod and/or land abandonment
Mechanism
Cultural treatments are implemented to increase forage quality and yield
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.