Geology topics

Mark W. Brunson

Publications and source records attributed to Mark W. Brunson.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2023

Goldilocks forbs: Survival is highest outside—but not too far outside—of Wyoming big sagebrush canopies

In arid and semiarid systems, positive effects of nurse shrubs generally occur immediately underneath and around shrub canopies, creating microsites that can be targeted to promote plant establishment in restoration settings. Alternatively, the best microsites may occur in the interspace zone immediately surrounding nurse shrubs if positive abiotic effects extend beyond nurse shrub canopy boundaries and if competition with nurse shrubs is reduced in that zone. In the Intermountain West, U.S.A., we investigated survival of transplanted herbaceous seedlings at different distances from Wyoming big sagebrush ( Artemisia tridentata ssp. wyomingensis ) canopies. We planted two native perennial forb species, Munro's globemallow ( Sphaeralcea munroana ) and common yarrow ( Achillea millefolium ), and two native perennial grass species, bluebunch wheatgrass ( Pseudoroegneria spicata ) and bottlebrush squirreltail ( Elymus elymoides ), at four distances from sagebrush canopies at six sites across the Intermountain West, repeated across 2 years. Under above-normal precipitation, proximity to sagebrush influenced first-year survival of the forb, but not grass, species. Globemallow and yarrow survival were highest mid-way between the canopy dripline and maximum interspace distance between neighboring sagebrush plants. Ground cover characteristics and globemallow survival covaried with respect to distance from shrub, suggesting ground cover characteristics as indicators of suitable planting microsites. Under drier conditions, survival of all species was low and unaffected by distance from canopies. Our results demonstrate the value of fine-tuning the canopy-interspace paradigm to more carefully consider how plant performance may differ across zones within the interspace region between plants, especially when the goal is to maximize plant establishment in nondrought years.

Restoration Ecology↗

USGS2023

Future direction of fuels management in sagebrush rangelands

Sagebrush ecosystems in the United States have been declining since EuroAmerican settlement, largely due to agricultural and urban development, invasive species, and altered fire regimes, resulting in loss of biodiversity and wildlife habitat. To combat continued conversion to undesirable ecological states and loss of habitat to invasive species fueled by frequent fire, a variety of fuel treatments, including networks of fuel breaks, are being implemented or proposed in sagebrush ecosystems, particularly in and around the Great Basin. In this forum paper we briefly review current knowledge of common fuel treatment approaches, their intended benefits, potential risks, and limitations. We additionally discuss challenges for fuel treatment strategies in the context of changes in climate, invasive species, wildlife habitat, and human population, and we explore how advances in geospatial technologies, monitoring, and fire behavior modeling, as well as accounting for social context, can improve the efficacy of fuels management in sagebrush ecosystems. Finally, given continued potential for ecosystem transformation, we describe approaches to future fuels management by considering the applicability of the Resist-Accept-Direct (RAD) framework. The intent of the paper is to provide scientists and land managers with key information and a forward-thinking framework for fuels science and adaptive management that can respond to both expected and unexpected changes in sagebrush rangelands.

Rangeland Ecology and Management↗

USGS2018

Weather-centric rangeland revegetation planning

Invasive annual weeds negatively impact ecosystem services and pose a major conservation threat on semiarid rangelands throughout the western United States. Rehabilitation of these rangelands is challenging due to interannual climate and subseasonal weather variability that impacts seed germination, seedling survival and establishment, annual weed dynamics, wildfire frequency, and soil stability. Rehabilitation and restoration outcomes could be improved by adopting a weather-centric approach that uses the full spectrum of available site-specific weather information from historical observations, seasonal climate forecasts, and climate-change projections. Climate data can be used retrospectively to interpret success or failure of past seedings by describing seasonal and longer-term patterns of environmental variability subsequent to planting. A more detailed evaluation of weather impacts on site conditions may yield more flexible adaptive-management strategies for rangeland restoration and rehabilitation, as well as provide estimates of transition probabilities between desirable and undesirable vegetation states. Skillful seasonal climate forecasts could greatly improve the cost efficiency of management treatments by limiting revegetation activities to time periods where forecasts suggest higher probabilities of successful seedling establishment. Climate-change projections are key to the application of current environmental models for development of mitigation and adaptation strategies and for management practices that require a multidecadal planning horizon. Adoption of new weather technology will require collaboration between land managers and revegetation specialists and modifications to the way we currently plan and conduct rangeland rehabilitation and restoration in the Intermountain West.

Rangeland Ecology and Management↗

USGS2017

Developing a translational ecology workforce

We define a translational ecologist as a professional ecologist with diverse disciplinary expertise and skill sets, as well as a suitable personal disposition, who engages across social, professional, and disciplinary boundaries to partner with decision makers to achieve practical environmental solutions. Becoming a translational ecologist requires specific attention to obtaining critical non‐scientific disciplinary breadth and skills that are not typically gained through graduate‐level education. Here, we outline a need for individuals with broad training in interdisciplinary skills, use our personal experiences as a basis for assessing the types of interdisciplinary skills that would benefit potential translational ecologists, and present steps that interested ecologists may take toward becoming translational. Skills relevant to translational ecologists may be garnered through personal experiences, informal training, short courses, fellowships, and graduate programs, among others. We argue that a translational ecology workforce is needed to bridge the gap between science and natural resource decisions. Furthermore, we argue that this task is a cooperative responsibility of individuals interested in pursuing these careers, educational institutions interested in training scientists for professional roles outside of academia, and employers seeking to hire skilled workers who can foster stakeholder‐engaged decision making.

Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment↗

USGS2017

Foundations of translational ecology

Ecologists who specialize in translational ecology (TE) seek to link ecological knowledge to decision making by integrating ecological science with the full complement of social dimensions that underlie today's complex environmental issues. TE is motivated by a search for outcomes that directly serve the needs of natural resource managers and decision makers. This objective distinguishes it from both basic and applied ecological research and, as a practice, it deliberately extends research beyond theory or opportunistic applications. TE is uniquely positioned to address complex issues through interdisciplinary team approaches and integrated scientist–practitioner partnerships. The creativity and context‐specific knowledge of resource managers, practitioners, and decision makers inform and enrich the scientific process and help shape use‐driven, actionable science. Moreover, addressing research questions that arise from on‐the‐ground management issues – as opposed to the top‐down or expert‐oriented perspectives of traditional science – can foster the high levels of trust and commitment that are critical for long‐term, sustained engagement between partners.

Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment↗