Study

Plant community responses to prescribed burning in Wisconsin sedge meadows

  • Published source details Kost M.A. & De Steven D. (2000) Plant community responses to prescribed burning in Wisconsin sedge meadows. Natural Areas Journal, 20, 36-45.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance: freshwater marshes

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Use prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance: freshwater marshes

    A replicated, paired, site comparison study in 1994 of eight sedge meadows in Wisconsin, USA (Kost & De Steven 2000) reported that burning reduced plant species richness in the short term and increased it in the long term, but found that burning typically had no significant effect on vegetation abundance after 1–8 growing seasons. Burned meadows had lower species richness than unburned meadows in three of five comparisons (burned ≤3 growing seasons previously: 27–30; unburned: 32–39 species/7.5 m2) but higher species richness in two of five comparisons (burned ≥4 growing seasons previously: 32–42; unburned: 26–39 species/7.5 m2). Statistical significance of richness results was not assessed. In two of five comparisons, burned meadows had higher cover of grasses (burned: 13–24%; unburned: 4%) and sedges/rushes (burned: 100–110%; unburned: 75%). Otherwise, vegetation abundance (grass cover, sedge/rush cover, forb cover, total live above-ground biomass) did not significantly or consistently differ between burned and unburned meadows. For data on these outcomes and on the cover of individual plant species, see original paper. Methods: In summer 1994, vegetation was surveyed in eight sedge meadows: five last burned, in spring, 1–8 growing seasons previously; three not burned for >30 years. Plant species and cover were recorded along three 100-m-long transects/meadow. Live vegetation was cut from five 0.1-m2 plots/meadow, then dried and weighed.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

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 18

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