Restoration of Calluna vulgaris on grass-dominated moorlands: the importance of disturbance, grazing and seeding
-
Published source details
Mitchell R.J., Rose R.J. & Palmer S.C.F. (2008) Restoration of Calluna vulgaris on grass-dominated moorlands: the importance of disturbance, grazing and seeding. Biological Conservation, 141, 2100-2111.
Published source details Mitchell R.J., Rose R.J. & Palmer S.C.F. (2008) Restoration of Calluna vulgaris on grass-dominated moorlands: the importance of disturbance, grazing and seeding. Biological Conservation, 141, 2100-2111.
Actions
This study is summarised as evidence for the following.
| Action | Category | |
|---|---|---|
|
Sow seeds Action Link |
 |
|
|
Use fences to exclude livestock from shrublands Action Link |
|
-
Sow seeds
A replicated, randomized, controlled study between 2002 and 2006 in two degraded moorlands in the UK (Mitchell et al. 2008) found that sowing heather Calluna vulgaris seeds increased the cover of heather. After three years, heather cover was higher in plots where heather seeds were sown (7%) than in plots where seeds were not sown (1%). At each site fifty-four 100 m2 plots were established. On half of each plot heather seeds were sown by hand at a rate of 26000 seeds/m2. Plant cover was estimated in nine 1 m2 quadrats in each plot annually between 2003 and 2006.
(Summarised by: Phil Martin)
-
Use fences to exclude livestock from shrublands
A replicated, controlled, randomized study in 2002–2006 in two degraded moorlands in the UK (Mitchell et al. 2008) found that using fences to exclude livestock increased the abundance of heather Calluna vulgaris plants in one of two sites after three years, but decreased the presence of heather in the other case. At one site heather plant density was higher in areas that were fenced to exclude livestock (38 plants/m2) than in unfenced areas (16 plants/m2), while at the other site there was no significant difference between fenced and unfenced areas. Similarly, at one site heather plants were present in fewer of the fenced plots (39%) than the in unfenced plots (46%), while at the other site there was no significant difference between fenced and unfenced areas. At each site fifty-four 100 m2 plots were established. Half of each plot was fenced with the other half left unfenced. Plant cover was estimated annually, between 2003 and 2006, using nine 1 m2 quadrats in each plot.
(Summarised by: Phil Martin)
