@article{powell_buehler_moorman_zobel_harper_2022, title={Vegetation structure and food availability following disturbance in recently restored early successional plant communities}, volume={10}, ISSN={["2328-5540"]}, DOI={10.1002/wsb.1372}, abstractNote={AbstractFields dominated by nonnative grasses, such as tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus), are being restored to native plant communities across the eastern U.S. Upon restoration, disturbance is necessary to maintain native communities in an early seral stage, and plant response to different management practices is of interest to managers to guide habitat enhancement for various wildlife species. We evaluated effects of burning and mowing following restoration of native plant communities via 2 methods (planting native grasses and forbs and seedbank response without planting), across 11 replicated sites in Tennessee and Alabama, 2019–2020. We compared vegetation composition and structure, openness at ground level, forage availability, and nutritional carrying capacity (NCC) following 4 treatments (Seedbank Burned, Seedbank Mowed, Planted Burned, Planted Mowed, and tall fescue Control), and we related these measurements to the food and cover requirements for 3 popular game species: white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), and northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus). The combination of planting and mowing increased grass coverage, whereas units that were established via seedbank response and managed by burning had greater forb coverage. Visual obstruction above 25 cm was greater in all treatments than Control, which provided cover that has been described as selected nesting cover by wild turkey and bedding cover for deer. Openness at ground level, which is especially important for bobwhite and wild turkey broods, was 30% greater in Seedbank Burned than Planted Mowed where we recorded the least openness among treatments by the second year of treatment. Similarly, coverage of bobwhite food and deer forage plant species was greatest in Seedbank Burned. Biomass (kg/ha) of plant species known to be selected as forage by deer was greater in all treatments than in Control, and NCC (deer days/ha) was greatest in Seedbank Burned by year 2. Our results highlight differences in plant composition and structure following management of early successional communities. Where possible, we encourage managers to use fire instead of mowing to maintain plant communities, especially if food plants and enhanced structure at multiple levels for bobwhite, wild turkey, and deer are management objectives. Furthermore, our results illustrate planting native grasses and forbs is not necessary to restore native early successional plant communities on most sites.}, journal={WILDLIFE SOCIETY BULLETIN}, author={Powell, Bonner L. and Buehler, David A. and Moorman, Christopher E. and Zobel, John M. and Harper, Craig A.}, year={2022}, month={Oct} }
 @article{harper_gefellers_buehler_moorman_zobel_2021, title={Plant Community Response and Implications for Wildlife Following Control of a Nonnative Perennial Grass}, volume={45}, ISSN={2328-5540 2328-5540}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wsb.1232}, DOI={10.1002/wsb.1232}, abstractNote={ABSTRACTRestoration of early successional plant communities dominated by nonnative plant species is a central focus of many state and federal agencies to improve habitat for wildlife associated with these communities. Restoration efforts largely have concentrated on controlling nonnative species followed by planting native grasses and forbs. However, there are numerous establishment problems associated with planting that warrant evaluation of alternative approaches for restoration. We conducted a field experiment to compare vegetation composition and structure as related to habitat for focal wildlife among plant communities established by planting (Planted) native grasses and forbs and revegetation from the seedbank (Seedbank) without planting following control of tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus) at 15 replicated sites in Tennessee and Alabama, USA. Planted and Seedbank treatments produced similar plant communities. Vegetation structure providing cover for nesting and brooding northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) and wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) was similar between Seedbank and Planted treatments except native grass cover was greatest in Planted, and we recorded greater openness at ground level in Seedbank than Planted or tall fescue control (Control). Abundance of northern bobwhite food plants and selected white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) forage were similar between Planted and Seedbank treatments, but nutritional carrying capacity for deer was greatest in Seedbank. Despite similarities in food abundance, and even though all forbs included in the planting mixtures were food plants, the majority of food plants in Planted were from the seedbank. The compositional and structural characteristics deemed most influential in previous studies to selection of breeding sites by dickcissel (Spiza americana), field sparrow (Spizella pusilla), grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum), Henslow's sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii), and northern bobwhite were similar in Planted and Seedbank. Tall fescue Control was most similar to characteristics of eastern meadowlark (Sturnella magna) breeding sites. Revegetation following Seedbank produced a plant community that provided habitat for many wildlife species equal to or better than Planted and was 3.7 times less expensive than Planted. © 2021 The Wildlife Society.}, number={4}, journal={Wildlife Society Bulletin}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Harper, Craig A. and Gefellers, J. Wade and Buehler, David A. and Moorman, Christopher E. and Zobel, John M.}, year={2021}, month={Dec}, pages={618–629} }
 @article{richardson_kroeger_moorman_harper_gardner_jones_strope_2020, title={Nesting Ecology of Northern Bobwhite on a Working Farm}, volume={44}, ISSN={2328-5540 2328-5540}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wsb.1125}, DOI={10.1002/wsb.1125}, abstractNote={ABSTRACTCreating early successional vegetation on working farms can increase northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus; hereafter, bobwhite) abundance with little reduction in crop production, but specific effects of field border establishment on bobwhite nesting ecology are not well understood. We monitored bobwhite nesting on a 1,740‐ha working farm with 19% of property managed for early successional vegetation in southeastern North Carolina, USA. We monitored 133 radio‐marked bobwhites from 1 April to 30 September in 2014 and 2015. We modelled nest‐site selection by comparing paired nest and random reference sites and modeled effects of habitat covariates on daily nest survival. Forb, shrub, and native warm‐season grass cover were greater at nest sites than reference sites with forb cover the strongest predictor of nest‐site selection. Bobwhite nested at a greater density in areas managed for fallow vegetation (1 nest/3 ha) than in planted warm‐season grasses and forbs (1 nest/5 ha). The daily nest survival rate over 2 years was 0.964 (SE = 0.007), and was not significantly influenced by any modeled covariate. Naïve nest success (nest successes/total nests) was 46.9%. The importance of forbs as nesting cover indicates bobwhite abundance in areas dominated by row‐crop agriculture may be limited by low nest initiation from a lack of herbaceous nesting cover. Hence, the creation of fallow herbaceous vegetation on working farms should be prioritized to increase bobwhite reproduction within agricultural landscapes. Furthermore, planting warm‐season grasses is not necessary because volunteer forbs and grasses provide as good or better nesting cover and can be less costly to establish. © 2020 The Wildlife Society.}, number={4}, journal={Wildlife Society Bulletin}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Richardson, Andy D. and Kroeger, Anthony J. and Moorman, Christopher E. and Harper, Craig A. and Gardner, Beth and Jones, Mark D. and Strope, Benjy M.}, year={2020}, month={Sep}, pages={677–683} }
 @article{kroeger_deperno_harper_rosche_moorman_2020, title={Northern Bobwhite Non‐Breeding Habitat Selection in a Longleaf Pine Woodland}, volume={84}, ISSN={0022-541X 1937-2817}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.21925}, DOI={10.1002/jwmg.21925}, abstractNote={ABSTRACTEfforts to halt the decline of the northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus; bobwhite) across its distribution have had limited success. Understanding bobwhite habitat requirements across the annual cycle and at varying scales is essential to aid efforts to conserve bobwhites. We monitored radio‐tagged bobwhites from 2016 to 2018 on a 165‐km2 portion of Fort Bragg Military Installation in the Sandhills physiographic region of North Carolina, USA, to determine factors influencing non‐breeding bobwhite habitat selection at multiple scales. We used generalized linear models (GLM) and generalized linear mixed models to assess bobwhite habitat selection at the microsite scale (the immediate vicinity of an animal) and the macrosite scale (across the study area), respectively, by comparing used points to available random points. At the microsite scale, bobwhites strongly selected areas with greater woody understory cover. Also, bobwhite selection increased with greater forb and switchcane (Arundinaria tecta) cover, but this effect plateaued at 65% forb cover and 50% switchcane cover. At the macrosite scale, bobwhites generally selected areas with greater understory cover within a 200‐m radius but avoided areas with >55% understory cover; these areas primarily were located in the core areas of drainages with extensive ericaceous vegetation. Bobwhites selected areas with 3–6 m2/ha hardwood basal area in uplands, potentially because of the availability of mast, but avoided uplands when pine (Pinus spp.) or hardwood basal area exceeded 20 m2/ha or 12 m2/ha, respectively, likely because high basal area is associated with increased shading and subsequent loss of understory cover. In addition, bobwhites selected uplands 1 growing season (≥2‐month period falling entirely between 1 Apr and 1 Oct) post‐fire regardless of burn season. Overall, managers seeking to improve habitat quality for bobwhites in longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) woodlands should employ management practices that maintain available woody understory across the landscape to provide cover during the non‐breeding season. © 2020 The Wildlife Society.}, number={7}, journal={The Journal of Wildlife Management}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Kroeger, Anthony J. and DePerno, Christopher S. and Harper, Craig A. and Rosche, Sarah B. and Moorman, Christopher E.}, year={2020}, month={Jul}, pages={1348–1360} }
 @article{gefellers_buehler_moorman_zobel_harper_2020, title={Seeding is not always necessary to restore native early successional plant communities}, volume={28}, ISSN={["1526-100X"]}, DOI={10.1111/rec.13249}, abstractNote={Restoration of native early successional plant communities in the eastern United States is a conservation priority because of declining populations of associated plants and wildlife. Restoration typically involves seeding native species and is often fraught with problems including weedy competition, expensive seed, and slow establishment. Pairing seed bank response with strategic herbicide applications may be an alternative approach for restoring these plant communities. We compared early successional plant communities established by seeding (SD) paired with selective herbicide use to natural revegetation (NR) from the seed bank paired with selective herbicide use at 18 locations that were previously row‐crop or tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus) fields in Tennessee, Alabama, and Kentucky, the United States. We did not detect differences in species diversity and richness, coverage of non‐native grasses and forbs, or number and coverage of native flowering forbs by season between NR and SD treatments at tall fescue or fallow crop sites. Species evenness was greatest in NR and coverage of native‐warm‐season grasses in SD. Species richness and coverage of native forbs were least in untreated tall fescue units (CNTL). More flexibility to use herbicides with NR reduced coverage of sericea lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata) in NR units compared to SD units at tall fescue sites. NR was 3.7 times cheaper than seeding. Land managers should consider using an NR approach to establish native early successional plant communities.}, number={6}, journal={RESTORATION ECOLOGY}, author={GeFellers, James Wade and Buehler, David A. and Moorman, Christopher E. and Zobel, John M. and Harper, Craig A.}, year={2020}, month={Nov}, pages={1485–1494} }
 @article{kroeger_moorman_lashley_chitwood_harper_deperno_2020, title={White-tailed deer use of overstory hardwoods in longleaf pine woodlands}, volume={464}, ISSN={0378-1127}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118046}, DOI={10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118046}, abstractNote={Restoration of the longleaf pine ecosystem is a conservation priority throughout the southeastern United States, but the role of hardwoods in providing food and cover for wildlife within this system is poorly understood. We investigated white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) movement and habitat selection relative to overstory hardwood distribution in a longleaf pine ecosystem at Fort Bragg Military Installation in the Sandhills physiographic region of North Carolina from March 2011–July 2013. We monitored GPS-collared female white-tailed deer and used generalized linear mixed models and step-selection functions to determine the influence of overstory composition and understory cover on seasonal white-tailed deer habitat selection. During fall and winter, deer selection increased with increasing upland hardwood overstory until reaching an upper threshold (12% and 7%; respectively) where increasing cover of upland hardwoods no longer increased selection. Also, in the fall and winter, deer selected areas with greater bottomland hardwood overstory until an upper threshold of 33% bottomland hardwood overstory was reached. In the spring, deer selected areas with <22% upland hardwood overstory. The effect size of understory cover, defined as lidar-classified vegetation with height <2 m, was larger than any other variable, regardless of season, and deer consistently selected areas with 20–75% understory cover. When managing longleaf pine woodlands for white-tailed deer, our results indicate maintaining a well-developed woody understory with 20–50% canopy closure is important, ideally with mature upland hardwood overstory cover between 4 and 12% to ensure mast production in fall and winter.}, journal={Forest Ecology and Management}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Kroeger, Anthony J. and Moorman, Christopher E. and Lashley, Marcus A. and Chitwood, M. Colter and Harper, Craig A. and DePerno, Christopher S.}, year={2020}, month={May}, pages={118046} }