Balancing Active and Passive Restoration in a Nonchemical, Research-Based Approach to Coastal Sage Scrub Restoration in Southern California

References

1. 1. Bakker J.D.,
   2. Wilson S.D.,
   3. Christian J.M.,
   4. Li X.,
   5. Ambrose L.G.,
   6. Waddington J.

   2003. Contingency of grassland restoration on year, site, and competition from introduced grasses. Ecological Applications 13:137–153.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
2. 1. Brosi B.J.,
   2. Biber E.G.

   2009. Statistical inference, Type II error, and decision making under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7:487–494.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
3. 1. Cabin R.J.

   2007. Science-driven restoration: A square grid on a round earth? Restoration Ecology 15:1–7.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
4. 1. Calflora

   . 2010. Information on California plants for education, research, and conservation. Berkeley: Calflora Database. www.calflora.org
5. 1. DeSimone S.A.

   2006. Non-chemical restoration of coastal sage scrub in artichoke thistle-infested grasslands (California). Ecological Restoration 24:278–279.

   OpenUrl
6. 1. DeSimone S.A.,
   2. Burk J.H.

   1992. Local variation in floristics and distributional factors in Californian coastal sage scrub. Madrono 39:170–188.

   OpenUrl
7. 1. DeSimone S.A.,
   2. Zedler P.H.

   1999. Shrub seedling recruitment in unburned Californian coastal sage scrub and adjacent grassland. Ecology 80:2018–2032.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
8. 1. DeSimone S.A.,
   2. Zedler P.H.

   2001. Do shrub colonizers of southern Californian grassland fit generalities for other woody colonizers? Ecological Applications 11:1101–1111.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
9. 1. Erdfelder E.,
   2. Faul F.,
   3. Buchner A.

   1996. GPOWER: A general power analysis program. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 28:1–11.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
10. 1. Freudenberger D.O.,
    2. Fish B.E.,
    3. Keeley J.E.

    1987. Distribution and stability of grasslands in the Los Angeles Basin. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 86:13–26.

    OpenUrl
11. 1. Giardina C.P.,
    2. Litton C.M.,
    3. Thaxton J.M.,
    4. Cordell S.,
    5. Hadway L.J.,
    6. Sandquist D.R.

    2007. Science and restoration under a big, demon haunted tent: Reply to Giardina et al. (2007). Restoration Ecology 15:377–381.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
12. 1. Klein J

    . 2007. Pseudo-replication, no replication, and a complete lack of control: In praise of dirty data for weed managers. Cal-IPC News 14:6, 8.

    OpenUrl
13. 1. Montalvo A.M.,
    2. McMillan P.A.,
    3. Allen E.B.

    2002. The relative importance of seeding method, soil ripping, and soil variables on seeding success. Restoration Ecology 10:52–67.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
14. 1. Morgan J.P.

    1997. Plowing and seeding. Pages 193–215 in Packard S., Mutel C.F. (eds), The Tallgrass Restoration Handbook. Washington DC: Island Press.
15. 1. Moyes A.B.,
    2. Ritter M.S.,
    3. Gamon J.A.

    2005. Restoration of native perennials in a California annual grassland after prescribed spring burning and solarization. Restoration Ecology 13:659–666.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
16. 1. Rice K.J.,
    2. Emery N.C.

    2003. Managing microevolution: Restoration in the face of global change. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 1:469–478.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
17. 1. Suding K.N.,
    2. Royall M.,
    3. Dixon T.,
    4. Valentovich T.

    2008. Measuring the sustainability of artichoke thistle (Cynara cardunculus) control efforts following suspension of control activities in historic southern California rangeland. 2008 Report to the Nature Reserve of Orange County (NROC) Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of California at Irvine.