ArticlePloS one2021
Balancing the need for seed against invasive species risks in prairie habitat restorations.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Rewilding and restoring nature in a changing world.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adequate diversity and abundance of native seed for large-scale grassland restorations often require commercially produced seed from distant sources. However, as sourcing distance increases, the likelihood of inadvertent introduction of multiple novel, non-native weed species as seed contaminants also increases. We created a model to determine an "optimal maximum distance" that would maximize availability of native prairie seed from commercial sources while minimizing the risk of novel invasive weeds via contamination. The model focused on the central portion of the Level II temperate prairie ecoregion in the Midwest US. The median optimal maximum distance from which to source seed was 272 km (169 miles). In addition, we weighted the model to address potential concerns from restoration practitioners: 1. sourcing seed via a facilitated migration strategy (i.e., direct movement of species from areas south of a given restoration site to assist species' range expansion) to account for warming due to climate change; and 2. emphasizing non-native, exotic species with a federal mandate to control. Weighting the model for climate change increased the median optimal maximum distance to 398 km (247 miles), but this was not statistically different from the distance calculated without taking sourcing for climate adaptation into account. Weighting the model for federally mandated exotic species increased the median optimal maximum distance only slightly to 293 km (182 miles), so practitioners may not need to adjust their sourcing strategy, compared to the original model. This decision framework highlights some potential inadvertent consequences from species translocations and provides insight on how to balance needs for prairie seed against those risks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.