Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorChairperson, Graduate Committee: Clayton B. Marlow.en
dc.contributor.authorSloane, Charles Emanuelen
dc.date.accessioned2013-06-25T18:37:01Z
dc.date.available2013-06-25T18:37:01Z
dc.date.issued2011en
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholarworks.montana.edu/xmlui/handle/1/2297en
dc.description.abstractCheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L.,) an invasive, annual grass species, degrades range and pasture lands by out competing and replacing preferred native grass species resulting in economic and ecological losses. Current control strategies are costly and ecological risky. Soil nitrogen depletion by promoting microbial nitrogen utilization by application of a carbohydrate energy source such as sucrose may decrease cheatgrass's competiveness and permit seedling establishment of preferred native species. Review of the literature reveals attempts at restoration of native grasses and elimination of cheatgrass by nitrogen depletion with sucrose applications have failed or at best achieved limited success. We believe one reason for failure is that soil microbes utilize applied simple carbohydrates such as sucrose too rapidly resulting in only short periods of nitrogen depletion, and that application of sugar beet pulp may promote a longer state of nitrogen depletion. We hypothesize the growth of nitrogen dependent invasive grasses will be inhibited by nitrogen deprivation produced by mulch application of coarse granulated sugar beet pulp, and that the inhibition of growth is not related to a passive mulch effect. In a four armed green house study, we compared cheatgrass and bluebunch wheatgrass growth after application of ground sugar beet pulp at rates of 0.0, 0.5, 1.0 2.0 and 4.0 tons per acre. As a control, granite chicken grit was similarly applied in equal volumes to rule out a passive mulch effect. At 35 days, there was a negative linear relationship between rate of sugar beet pulp application and cheatgrass growth (p <0.001) and BBW growth (p<0.002). The negative effect of sugar beet pulp on cheatgrass growth was twice the negative effect on blue bunch growth. Granite grit application did not decrease growth of either species. We conclude that sugar beet pulp application depresses cheatgrass growth and that the cause is not a passive mulch effect. Our data indicates that longer duration nitrogen deprivation may aid in promoting restoration of cheatgrass dominated acreages, and treatments such as sugar beet pulp application may permit native grass seedling emergence and establishment.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherMontana State University - Bozeman, College of Agricultureen
dc.subject.lcshSugar beeten
dc.subject.lcshCheatgrass bromeen
dc.subject.lcshWheatgrassesen
dc.subject.lcshInvasive plantsen
dc.titleEffects of sugar beet pulp on cheatgrass and bluebunch wheatgrass growth under controlled conditionsen
dc.typeThesisen
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2011 by Charles Emanuel Sloaneen
thesis.catalog.ckey1721776en
thesis.degree.committeemembersMembers, Graduate Committee: Dennis Cash; James Jacobsen
thesis.degree.departmentAnimal & Range Sciences.en
thesis.degree.genreThesisen
thesis.degree.nameMSen
thesis.format.extentfirstpage1en
thesis.format.extentlastpage38en
mus.relation.departmentAnimal & Range Sciences.en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


MSU uses DSpace software, copyright © 2002-2017  Duraspace. For library collections that are not accessible, we are committed to providing reasonable accommodations and timely access to users with disabilities. For assistance, please submit an accessibility request for library material.