| Literature DB >> 30083978 |
Lela Z Culpepper1, Hsiao-Hsuan Wang2, Tomasz E Koralewski1,3, William E Grant3, William E Rogers1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Invasions by non-native plants contribute to loss of ecosystem biodiversity and productivity, modification of biogeochemical cycles, and inhibition of natural regeneration of native species. Japanese stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum (Trin.) A. Campus) is one of the most prevalent invasive grasses in the forestlands of Tennessee, United States. We measured the extent of invasion, identified potential factors affecting invasion, and quantified the relative importance of each factor. We analyzed field data collected by the Forest Inventory and Analysis Program of the U.S. Forest Service to measure the extent of invasion from 2005 to 2011 and identified potential factors affecting invasion during this period using boosted regression trees.Entities:
Keywords: Biological invasion; Boosted regression trees; Forest management; Japanese stiltgrass, Microstegium vimineum; Likelihood of invasion
Year: 2018 PMID: 30083978 PMCID: PMC6079111 DOI: 10.1186/s40529-018-0236-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bot Stud ISSN: 1817-406X Impact factor: 2.787
Descriptions, possible values or units of measure, and means or counts of landscape conditions, forest features, forest management activities, and disturbance factors evaluated as potential factors of site invasion by Japanese stiltgrass in forest plots in Tennessee
| Variable | Value or unit of measure | Mean (range) for continuous data/count for categorical data |
|---|---|---|
| Landscape conditions | ||
| Elevation | m | 213.04 (− 28.04 to 1809.9) |
| Slope | Degree | 10.88 (0.00 to 57.5) |
| Adjacency to water bodies | No | 2138 |
| Yes | 665 | |
| Forest features | ||
| Stand age | Years | 55.42 (2 to 137) |
| L1: 0 to 1.39 m3/ha/year | 0 | |
| L2: 1.40 to 3.39 | 256 | |
| L3: 3.50 to 5.94 | 1840 | |
| Site productivity | L4: 5.95 to 8.39 | 802 |
| L5: 8.40 to 11.54 | 290 | |
| L6: 11.55 to 15.74 | 78 | |
| L7: > 15.74 | 11 | |
| Tree species diversity (Hs) | Shannon’s species diversity | 1.88 (0 to 3.02) |
| Basal area | m2/ha | 22.53 (0.00 to 332.34) |
| Natural regenerationa | No | 3483 |
| Yes | 64 | |
| Forest management activities | ||
| Site preparationa | No | 3508 |
| Yes | 39 | |
| Artificial regenerationa | No | 3389 |
| Yes | 158 | |
| Cuttinga | No | 3270 |
| Yes | 277 | |
| Forestland ownership | Public | 486 |
| Private | 3061 | |
| Disturbance factors | ||
| D3: 92 to 152 m | 354 | |
| D4: 153 to 305 | 578 | |
| D5: 306 to 805 | 777 | |
| Distance to the nearest road | D6: 806 to 1609 | 333 |
| D7: 1610 to 4828 | 116 | |
| D8: 4829 to 8047 | 11 | |
| D9: > 8047 | 7 | |
| Fire disturbancea | No | 3511 |
| Yes | 36 | |
| Animal disturbancea | No | 3478 |
| Yes | 69 | |
| Disease disturbancea | No | 3537 |
| Yes | 10 | |
| Insect disturbancea | No | 3421 |
| Yes | 126 | |
| Human-caused disturbancea | No | 3482 |
| Yes | 65 | |
| Weather disturbancea | No | 3470 |
| Yes | 77 | |
aNormally within the past 5 years
Fig. 1Presence (black dots) and absence (gray dots) of Japanese stiltgrass in forested plots sampled in Tennessee in surveys conducted a 2000–2005 and b 2006–2011 as part of the Forest Inventory and Analysis Program of the U.S. Forest Service
Fig. 2Comparison of the percent coverage (PC) of Japanese stiltgrass during the first survey (2000–2005, gray bar) and the second survey (2006–2011, black bar) conducted by the Forest Inventory and Analysis Program of the U.S. Forest Service. Results are summarized in terms of the number of plots in each of the indicated categories: 0% < PC ≤ 20%, 20% < PC ≤ 40%, 40% < PC ≤ 60%, and PC > 60%
Fig. 3Partial dependence plots for the explanatory variables included in the optimal boosted regression tree model for Japanese stiltgrass presence based on analyses of the six most influential variables. Hash marks at the top of plot a–d indicate distribution of sample plots along the range of the indicated variable. There is no hash mark at the top of plot e and f because the partial dependence plots represent categorical variables. X-axes indicate influential variables and their relative contributions (%) in the final model (see Table 1 for the description of variables). Y-axes are based on the logit scale used for the indicated variable