Spacing and competition between planted grass plugs and preexisting perennial grasses in a restoration site in Oregon

  • Published source details Huddleston R.T. & Young T.P. (2004) Spacing and competition between planted grass plugs and preexisting perennial grasses in a restoration site in Oregon. Restoration Ecology, 12, 546-551.


A study was undertaken to assess the effects of established Lemmon's needlegrass Achnatherum lemmonii (a native perennial) on planted plugs of two native perennial bunchgrasses at a prairie restoration site in the Agate Desert (42°25′N, 122°52′W), Oregon, northwest USA.

Vegetation was similar across experimental plots, being dominated by non-native annual grasses (primarily soft brome Bromus hordeaceus) and forbs for many decades, and grazed by cattle.
At a nursery, local seed of native bluebunch wheatgrass Pseudoroegneria spicata and Idaho fescue Festuca idahoensis was planted on 25 August 1999 in 5 x 5 x 13 cm soil-filled plastic containers. On 31 October the resultant plugs were planted at 6, 12 of 18 cm from established A. lemmonii bunchgrasses and also in plots without A. lemmonii (16, 1 x 5 m plots).
Plug condition, herbivory and gopher activity in the plot areas were monitored throughout the experiment. On 10 and 14 June 2000, basal diameter and tiller height were remeasured and flowering culms produced by each plug counted.

Plug survival was high in all plots (average > 98%) despite some herbivory on several and extensive gopher activity throughout the area. Plugs planted at 6 cm from established grasses had significantly lower growth and reproduction (around 50% less flowering culms) than plugs planted at 18 cm and those not planted in the vicinity of A. lemmonii.
The results suggest that inter-planting distances of 18 cm were sufficient to greatly reduce competitive effects on newly planted plugs, at least during early establishment.
Note: If using or referring to this published study, please read and quote the original paper, this can be viewed at:

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 21

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 ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust