A COMPARISON OF TECHNIQUES FOR RESTORING HEATHLAND ON ABANDONED FARMLAND

Citation
Rf. Pywell et al., A COMPARISON OF TECHNIQUES FOR RESTORING HEATHLAND ON ABANDONED FARMLAND, Journal of Applied Ecology, 32(2), 1995, pp. 400-411
Citations number
27
Categorie Soggetti
Ecology
Journal title
ISSN journal
00218901
Volume
32
Issue
2
Year of publication
1995
Pages
400 - 411
Database
ISI
SICI code
0021-8901(1995)32:2<400:ACOTFR>2.0.ZU;2-0
Abstract
1. Recent changes in agricultural policies have reduced the extent of cultivated farmland. This has provided opportunities to restore heathl and vegetation on lowland sites where it once occurred. 2. Between Dec ember 1988 and April 1990 large-scale replicated experiments were esta blished on abandoned farmland in southern Britain to compare the effec tiveness of four treatments for heathland restoration: (i) the applica tion of herbicide; (ii) the addition of harvested heather shoots; (iii ) the addition of heathland topsoil; and (iv) the translocation of hea thland turves. 3. The number of seedlings of heathland plant species o n each treatment was counted in December 1990 and 1991, and the shoot frequency of these species was recorded in January 1993. 4. The grassl and soil had a significantly higher pH and contained greater concentra tions of extractable phosphorus and exchangeable calcium than that of the adjacent heathland. Despite this, the controls showed that there w as some natural regeneration of heathers within the grassland. 5. Herb icide treatment inhibited the regeneration of heathland plants. Cultiv ation followed by the application of harvested heather shoots increase d the number of seedlings of heathland plant species, but some key spe cies were missing. All the components of the heathland plant community occurred in greater numbers on the plots where heathland topsoil had been applied, and on the parts of transferred heathland turves which h ad died from drought. 6. The large-scale translocation of heathland tu rf appeared to be feasible and instantly recreated the mature heathlan d plant community. However, some changes in the plant community occurr ed which probably resulted from differences in soil drainage character istics between the donor and recipient sites. Of the different sources of heathland plant propagules, harvested heather shoots were a renewa ble resource, whereas the collection of heathland topsoil and turves i nvolved the destruction of existing heathland.