Sundaram, Bharath and Prasad, Ayesha and Hiremath, Ankila J. (2018) Restoring Lantana camara Invaded Tropical Deciduous Forest: The Response of Native Plant Regeneration to two Common Lantana Removal Practices. Indian Forester, 144 (6). pp. 545-552. ISSN 2321-094X
144_6_7.pdf - Published Version
Restricted to Registered users only
Download (500kB) | Request a copy
Abstract
It is widely accepted that invasive species can alter community structure and composition (Hejda et al., 2009; Vonshak et al., 2010), transform ecosystem processes (Rossiter-Rachor et al., 2009), and affect the supply of ecosystem services(Vila et al., 2010). As a result, the development of effective techniques to remove or control invasive species is now a priority for scientists and managers worldwide (D'Antonio and Meyerson, 2002; D'Antonio et al., 2004). So much so, that Hulme (2006) has suggested the application of ecological knowledge to invasive species management is possibly the best repayment for public investment in ecological research. Invasive species removal does not always guarantee the restoration of native biological diversity. While in some cases removal has led to an increase in native species diversity, e.g., Mimosa pigra management with a combination of herbicide, mechanical methods, fire, and biological control (Paynter and Flanagan, 2004), in other cases removal has resulted in a decrease in native species diversity, e.g., the post-fire use of herbicides in the control of Asparagus asparagoides (Turner and Virtue, 2009). It is thus important to understand the site-specific response of native communities to different invasive species removal or control techniques (Flory and Clay, 2009). The outcome of invasive species removal can also be a function of the method employed. For instance, a common technique—cutting and burning above-ground biomass—is a practical way of clearing invasive species but could kill seeds in the soil seed-bank, jeopardizing post-removal regeneration; burning could also kill mycorrhizal spores in the soil, rendering a site hostile for colonization by all but non-mycorrhizal graminoids (Holmes et al., 2000). Uprooting is another common technique. Uprooting and removing invasive species biomass could lower the potential amount of phytotoxins in the soil, enabling post-removal colonization by species that would be inhibited by allelopathic invaders (Gentle and Duggin, 1997). Additionally, uprooting can bring buried seeds to the soil surface and accelerate colonization, assuming the seed-bank is not saturated with seeds of the invader, e.g., in the case of Mimosa pigra (Lonsdale et al., 1988).
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Additional Information: | Copyright of this article belongs to the authors |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Community composition, Restoration, India, Invasive species, Regeneration. |
| Subjects: | A ATREE Publications > G Journal Papers |
| Divisions: | SM Sehgal Foundation Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation |
| Depositing User: | Ms Suchithra R |
| Date Deposited: | 24 Nov 2025 09:21 |
| Last Modified: | 04 Dec 2025 11:31 |
| URI: | http://archives.atree.org/id/eprint/1028 |

Altmetric
Altmetric