Study

The relative importance of seeding method, soil ripping, and soil variables on seeding success

  • Published source details Montalvo A.M., McMillan P.A. & Allen E.B. (2002) The relative importance of seeding method, soil ripping, and soil variables on seeding success. Restoration Ecology, 10, 52-67.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Drill seed rather than seeding by hand

Action Link
Grassland Conservation

Spray slurry of seed, mulch and water (‘hydroseeding’)

Action Link
Grassland Conservation
  1. Drill seed rather than seeding by hand

    A replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in 1998–1999 in a former arable field in California, USA (Montalvo et al. 2002) found that drill seeding did not increase the abundance of four of six plant species compared to applying a slurry of mulch and seeds (‘hydroseeding’). The abundance of three of six plant species was lower in areas where drill seeding was used (0.2–10.0 plants/m2) than in areas where seeds were applied in a slurry (0.3–17.0 plants/m2). However, the abundance of two species was higher where drill seeding was used (drill: 2–18 plants/m2; seeds in slurry: 1–12 plants/m2), and in one case there was no significant difference (drill: 313–370 plants/m2; seeds in slurry: 228–368 plants/m2). In February 1998, eight blocks each with three 27 × 4.5 m plots were established. In each block, one plot was seeded with a seed drill to a depth of 6–12 mm, and one plot had a slurry of seed, water, and wood fibre applied at a rate of 560 kg/ha. A straw mulch was applied to all plots at a rate of 1,680 kg/ha and a hydromulch slurry of water, wood fibre, and soil stabilizer was sprayed over the straw. In July 1998 and January and May 1999, plant abundance in each plot was estimated using six 4 × 4 m quadrats.

    (Summarised by: Philip Martin)

  2. Spray slurry of seed, mulch and water (‘hydroseeding’)

    A replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in 1998–1999 in a former arable field in California, USA (Montalvo et al. 2002) found that hydroseeding increased the abundance of half of plant species compared to drill seeding. The abundance of three of six plant species was higher in areas where hydroseeding was used (0.3–17.0 plants/m2) than where drill seeding was used (0.2–10.0 plants/m2). However, abundance of two species was lower (hydroseeded: 1–12 plants/m2; drill: 2–18 plants/m2), and in one case there was no significant difference (hydroseeded: 228–368 plants/m2; drill: 313–370 plants/m2). In February 1998, eight blocks each with three 27 × 4.5 m plots were established. In each block, one plot was hydroseeded using a slurry of seed, water, and wood fibre at a rate of 560 kg/ha, while in one plot seeds were drilled to a depth of 6–12 mm. A straw mulch was applied to all plots at a rate of 1,680 kg/ha. A hydromulch slurry of water, wood fibre, and soil stabilizer was sprayed over the straw. In July 1998 and January and May 1999, plant abundance in each plot was estimated using six 4 × 4 m quadrats.

    (Summarised by: Philip Martin)

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