Click
here to return to main page
What is the Effectiveness of
Treatments on African Star Grass
By En Fuego (Teri, Megan, Nancy, Melvin, and Ken M.)
A
current concern exists in Costa Rica as to what the best way may be to return
pastures to native habitat. We decided
to look at three plots already in existence to determine what the effectiveness
of differing treatments are in controlling African Star Grass, an introduced
species that was brought into the country for cattle to graze. The plots that we looked at included a plot
which is burned yearly, one that is grazed regularly, and one that has no
grazing and no burning. We used a
quadrat method in the burned plot, a combination transect/quadrat method in the
control plot, and due to time constraints only had time to collect species in
the grazed plot. The three plots were
found to be quite different in terms of species present. We determined that burning is the least
effective method of eliminating the star grass since the burned plot was found
to contain 86% grass cover. Grazing
appears to create enough of a disturbance to allow acacia growth to flourish as
compared to the control plot but does appear to effectively control the star
grass.
El
Parque Nacional Palo Verde (The Palo Verde National Park) and La Reserva
Biologia de Loma Bardubal (the Biological Reserve of Bandubal) in Bargaces,
Guanacaste are located in one of the driest ecosystems of Costa Rica. In this region an extensive history of
cattle ranching exists which spans over four hundred years. During this period fire was the “tool” of
choice to clear the agricultural waste at the end of each growing season. The practice of burning the plant material
as a means of disposing waste ended in 1977 when Palo Verde became a wildlife
refuge. Due to its nature as a
deciduous tropical forest both Palo Verde and Loma Bardubal generate a great
deal of leaf litter which form a thick layer of ground cover. This material serves as an excellent fuel
for forest fires (Acuna-Perez, 1995).
At the end of each growing season the cattle ranchers and other
agricultural businesses surrounding Palo Verde burned the plant material left
in the field. Often fires would go out
of control, resulting in hundreds of hectacres of tropical forest vegetation
and wildlife being destroyed. For
instance, in 1994 a fierce fire destroyed a large area of Laguna Bocana. Along with the vegetation, many native
species of fauna, such as turtles, were destroyed.
The
proliferation of the exotic species African Star Grass (Jaragua), Hypharrenia
rufa, into the tropical forest has added fuel to an already serious
problem. Due to its invasive nature and
combustibility, H. rufa acts as a catalyst for fire both in Palo Verde and Loma
Barduba.
Fire
prevention practices of the past had proven to be ineffective in slowing down
destruction of the natural resources and wildlife due to fires. A pilot program was conducted from 1991 to
1995 to determine which method was more effective in controlling, if not
eliminating, the spread of H. rufa and the high incidence of fires in Palo
Verde and Loma Bardubal. The research
design for this study involved the use of grazing cattle, as a method of
biological control, and controlled burning to determine the effectiveness of
controlling African Star Grass.
Three
pre-arranged 20m x 20m plots were selected for our study. Each plot was
measured for its length and width with
measuring tape to determine a more exact area. The plant species count for each
plot was determined by walking in and carefully scanning the ground. A sample
of each different species was collected in a small ziplock bag and labeled.
These samples were brought back to the lab for further analysis and
identification.
The
relative abundance (population density) of each plant species was determined
for plots 1 and 2. In both cases a
square (1.0m x 1.0m) quadrat made of steel with markings every 10cm was used.
Plot
1 was visibly abundant in grass (greater than 70%), with limited canopy cover.
Six microhabitats were visible in the plot, including the grass habitat. For
this reason, the microhabitat areas were measured, and the quadrat method was
used to determine the population density of each species in the plot.
Plot 2 was visibly limited in ground growth, but had a relatively full canopy. Unlike Plot 1, a limited number of microhabitats could not be determined. For this reason the transect and quadrat method was used to determine the population density of the plants species there. A measuring tape was laid out from opposite corners of the plot. The quadrat was laid along the measuring tape starting at 0m, every ten meters. Since the distance was 30m from corner to opposite corner, four quadrats were taken for each transect, and a total of eight quadrats were analyzed in this plot.
Area of plot: 391 m2
Microhabitat
A: 22 m2
|
Grass |
65.5% |
|
Composite |
33.5% |
|
Mimosa |
<
1% |
|
Sedge |
<
1% |
|
Unknown
Vine Z Fabaceae |
<
1% |
|
Open
ground cover |
1% |
Microhabitat
B: 1.25 m2
|
Grass |
83% |
|
Mint |
5% |
|
Composite |
3% |
|
Mimosa |
1% |
|
Nicotina |
1% |
|
Unknown
X |
1% |
|
Open
ground cover |
6% |
Microhabitat
C: 5.4 m2
|
Grass |
58% |
|
Unknown
W |
35% |
|
Passion
flower |
5% |
|
Composite |
2% |
|
Sedge |
<
1% |
|
Spurge |
<
1% |
|
Unknown
Z Fabaceae |
<
1% |
|
Mimosa |
<
1% |
|
Open
ground cover |
1% |
Microhabitat
D: 4.69 m2
|
Grass |
66% |
|
Sapindaceae |
8% |
|
Mimosa |
<
1% |
|
Composite |
<
1% |
|
Species
Y Solanaceae |
<
1% |
|
Open
ground cover |
26% |
Microhabitat
E: 2.34 m2
|
Grass |
92% |
|
Fabaceae |
6% |
|
Species
Z Fabaceae |
<
1% |
|
Open
ground cover |
2% |
Grass
Habitat area: 355 m2
|
|
Trial
1 |
Trial
2 |
Trial
3 |
AVERAGE
|
|
Grass |
90% |
90% |
83% |
88% |
|
Mimosa |
2% |
1% |
1% |
1.3% |
|
Unknown
Z Fabaceae |
<
1% |
<
1% |
<
1% |
< 1% |
|
Sedge |
<
1% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Open
ground cover |
7% |
9% |
16% |
11% |
Total
Abundance of plant species in plot 1:
|
Grass |
86.0% |
|
Open ground cover |
10.4% |
|
Composite |
1.9% |
|
Mimosa |
1.2% |
|
All other plant species |
< 1% |
Plot
2: Unburned, no grazing (control)
Area of plot: 472 m2
Transect
1, Quadrat 1
|
2b |
25% |
|
2a |
<
1% |
|
2c |
<
1% |
|
2d |
<
1% |
|
2e |
<
1% |
|
2f |
<
1% |
|
Open
ground cover |
75% |
Transect
1, Quadrat 2
|
Mimosa |
<
1% |
|
2a |
<
1% |
|
2g |
<
1% |
|
2h |
<
1% |
|
2i |
<
1% |
|
2j |
<
1% |
|
Open
ground cover |
99% |
Transect
1, Quadrat 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plot
3: Unburned, low density grazing until 1995
Area: