Study

Effects of fire, ash, and litter on soil nitrate, temperature, moisture and tobosagrass production in the rolling plains

  • Published source details Sharrow S.H. & Wright H.A. (1977) Effects of fire, ash, and litter on soil nitrate, temperature, moisture and tobosagrass production in the rolling plains. Journal of Range Management, 30, 266-270.

Summary

In tobosagrass Hilaria mutica-honey mesquite Prosopis glundulosa var. glandulosa communities of southern USA, prescribed spring burning kills some mesquite trees, removes dead trees, and increases tobosagrass production for grazers. Two studies were undertaken, the first near Colorado City (central Texas) and the second near the town of Post to the northwest. Objectives were to measure changes in nitrate, exchangeable ammonium, total soil nitrogen, soil moisture and soil temperatures following spring burning, and to determine the extent to which each increased tobosagrass growth.

Both sites had dense stands of tobosagrass with a fairly open canopy of honey mesquite; long-term average annual precipitation was 48cm.
 
The first study was conducted in 1972-1973 on Spade Ranch. It examined soil temperature, moisture, nitrate and total nitrogen as possible explanations for increased tobosagrass yields following fire. Three 0.4 hectare plots within a 2 ha grazing exclosure received one of the following treatments: burned (March 10); clipped (12 to 19 March), no treatment (control).
 
Following from this, a second study was conducted in 1974 to evaluate the relative importance of litter removal, ash deposition, and fire heat in stimulating tobosagrass.

Removal of litter by burning or clipping increased soil temperature and nitrogen mineralization rate. Ash had no effect on these properties in 1972, but appeared to stimulate tobosagrass production in 1974. With adequate soil moisture, the higher soil temperatures on burned or clipped plots stimulated grass growth, which concomitantly, reduced soil moisture and nitrates. Suboptimal (lower) soil temperatures on partially shaded control plots appeared to limit growth, despite adequate soil moisture and nitrate.
 
Precipitation during 1972 was about 20% above average in Colorado City. In 1974 at Post it was 48% below average, until 1 August (11-13 cm fell during winter-spring and 40-42 cm during summer-autumn). In this dry year, soil moisture was the limiting plant growth factor and burning exhibited no beneficial effects.
 
 
Note: If using or referring to this published study, please read and quote the original paper, this can be viewed at: https://www.uair.arizona.edu/holdings/journal/issue?r=http://jrm.library.arizona.edu/Volume30/Number4/

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 19

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust