Cited by 36Rangeland and Wildlife ManagementEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics

Long‐Term Effects of Biosolids on Revegetation of Disturbed Sagebrush Steppe in Northwestern Colorado

Paschke, Mark W., Topper, Karl, Brobst, Robert B., Redente, Edward F.·2005·Restoration Ecology

Abstract

A study was conducted to evaluate the long‐term effects of biosolids amendment on restoration of disturbed sagebrush steppe habitat in northwestern Colorado. Twenty‐four years after biosolids amendment, soil fertility and plant community development were studied in replicated plots receiving various biosolids amendments on two different substrates. The two substrates used were a subsoil, determined to have low initial fertility, and a topsoil over retorted shale substrate, determined to have relatively high initial fertility. Results suggest that biosolids amendments have long‐lasting effects on soil fertility and plant community composition, but these effects vary between the two substrates that were utilized. Within the plots established on subsoil, the long‐term effect of biosolids was a reduction in plant species diversity and dominance by perennial grasses. On the topsoil substrate, there was a decrease in perennial grasses and an increase in shrub dominance with increasing biosolids. Results demonstrate the importance of considering initial soil conditions, seed mixture, and biosolids application rate when using biosolids for restoration of disturbed sagebrush steppe habitat. The long‐term effects of the biosolids treatments at this site demonstrate the need to consider restoration treatment effects over longer and more ecologically meaningful time frames.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1526-100x.2005.00068.x

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Raw biosolids can release nitrogen very rapidly, giving a burst of fertility that promotes annual weed species, which may dominate the vegetation and reduce biodiversity.

    “Raw biosolids can release nitrogen very rapidly giving a burst of fertility that promotes annual weed species, which may dominate the vegetation and reduce biodiversity (Paschke et al. 2005).”

    From The role of organic amendments in soil reclamation: A review (2012) · cites this paper as Paschke et al. 2005

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Paschke, M. W., Topper, K., Brobst, R. B., & Redente, E. F.
Affiliations
  • Colorado State University (US)
  • Colorado Mesa University (US)
  • Environmental Protection Agency (US)
Corresponding author
Paschke, Mark W.
Venue
Restoration Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-08-15
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
545-551
ISSN
  • 1061-2971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-100X
OpenAlex
W2015733971
Cited by
36
References
15
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Restoration Ecology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Keywords
sagebrush steppe, revegetation, habitat restoration, soil fertility, floristic composition, species diversity, perennial grasses, substrate effects, northwestern Colorado

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review