Native species richness of commercial plant vendors in the Midwestern United States

REFERENCES

1. ↵
   1. Baisden EC,
   2. Tallamy DW,
   3. Narango DL,
   4. Boyle E

   . 2018. Do cultivars of native plants support insect herbivores? HortTechnology 28:596–606. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTTECH03957-18

   OpenUrl
2. ↵
   1. Baker AM,
   2. Redmond CT,
   3. Malcolm SB,
   4. Potter DA

   . 2020. Suitability of native milkweed (Asclepias) species versus cultivars for supporting monarch butterflies and bees in urban gardens. PeerJ 8:e9823. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9823

   OpenUrl
3. ↵
   1. Broadhurst LM,
   2. Jones TA,
   3. Smith FS,
   4. North T,
   5. Guja L

   . 2016. Maximizing seed resources for restoration in an uncertain future. BioScience 66:73–79. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biv155

   OpenUrlCrossRef
4. ↵
   1. Brudvig LA

   . 2011. The restoration of biodiversity: where has research been and where does it need to go? American Journal of Botany 98:549–558. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.1000285

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
5. ↵
   1. Brzuszek R,
   2. Harkess R

   . 2009. Green industry survey of native plant marketing in the southeastern United States. HortTechnology 19:168–172. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.19.1.168

   OpenUrl
6. ↵
   1. Burghardt KT,
   2. Tallamy DW,
   3. Philips C,
   4. Shropshire KJ

   . 2010. Non-native plants reduce abundance, richness, and host specialization in lepidopteran communities. Ecosphere 1:11. https://doi.org/10.1890/ES10-00032.1

   OpenUrl
7. ↵
   1. Cavender-Bares J,
   2. Padullés Cubino JJ,
   3. Pearse WD,
   4. Hobbie SE,
   5. Lange AJ,
   6. Knapp S,
   7. Nelson KC

   . 2020. Horticultural availability and homeowner preferences drive plant diversity and composition in urban yards. Ecological Applications 30:e202082. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2082

   OpenUrl
8. ↵
   1. Coombs G,
   2. Gilchrist D,
   3. Watson P

   . 2020. An assessment of the native and invasive plants sold in the mid-Atlantic region. Native Plants Journal 21:74–82. https://doi.org/10.3368/npj.21.1.74

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
9. ↵
   1. Dunne RA,
   2. Dunne CG

   . 2003. Trends in the western native plant seed industry since 1990. Native Plants Journal 4:88–94. https://doi.org/10.3368/npj.4.2.88

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
10. ↵
    1. Freyman WA,
    2. Masters LA,
    3. Packard S

    . 2016. The Universal Floristic Quality Assessment (FQA) Calculator: an online tool for ecological assessment and monitoring. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 7:380–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12491

    OpenUrl
11. ↵
    1. Gibson-Roy P

    . 2018. Restoring grassy ecosystems—feasible or fiction? An inquisitive Australian’s experience in the USA. Ecological Management and Restoration 19:11–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12327

    OpenUrl
12. ↵
    1. Goddard MA,
    2. Dougill AJ,
    3. Benton TG

    . 2010. Scaling up from gardens: biodiversity conservation in urban environments. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 25:90–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.07.016

    OpenUrl
13. ↵
    1. Haase DL,
    2. Davis AS

    . 2017. Developing and supporting quality nursery facilities and staff are necessary to meet global forest and landscape restoration needs. Reforesta 4:69–93. https://doi.org/10.21750/REFOR.4.06.45

    OpenUrl
14. ↵
    1. Hancock N, Gibson-
    2. Roy P,
    3. Driver M,
    4. Broadhurst LM

    . 2020. The Australian native seed survey report. Canberra: Australian Network for Plant Conservation.
15. 1. Jones TA

    . 2019. Native seeds in the marketplace: meeting restoration needs in the Intermountain West, United States. Rangeland Ecology and Management 72:1017–1029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2019.07.009

    OpenUrl
16. ↵
    1. Kramer AT,
    2. Crane B,
    3. Downing J,
    4. Hamrick JL,
    5. Havens K,
    6. Highland A,
    7. Jacobi SK,
    8. Kaye TN,
    9. Lonsdorf EV,
    10. Neale JR,
    11. Novy A,
    12. Smouse PE,
    13. Tallamy DW,
    14. White A,
    15. Zeldin J

    . 2019. Sourcing native plants to support ecosystem function in different planting contexts. Restoration Ecology 27:470–476. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12931

    OpenUrl
17. ↵
    1. Ladouceur E,
    2. Jiménez-Alfaro B,
    3. Marin M, De
    4. Vitis M,
    5. Abbandonato H,
    6. Iannetta PPM,
    7. Bonomi C,
    8. Pritchard HW

    . 2018. Native seed supply and the restoration species pool. Conservation Letters 11:e12381. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12381

    OpenUrl
18. ↵
    1. McGill BJ,
    2. Etienne RS,
    3. Gray JS,
    4. Alonso D,
    5. Anderson MJ,
    6. Benecha HK,
    7. Dornelas M,
    8. Enquist BJ,
    9. Green JL,
    10. He F,
    11. Hurlbert AH,
    12. Magurran AE,
    13. Marquet PA,
    14. Maurer BA,
    15. Ostling A,
    16. Soykan CU,
    17. Ugland KI,
    18. White EP

    . 2007. Species abundance distributions: moving beyond single prediction theories to integration within an ecological framework. Ecology Letters 10:995–1015. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01094.x

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
19. ↵
    1. Narango DL,
    2. Tallamy DW,
    3. Marra PP

    . 2017. Native plants improve breeding and foraging habitat for an insectivorous bird. Biological Conservation 213:42–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.06.029

    OpenUrl
20. ↵
    1. Ramírez-Soto A,
    2. Villa-Bonilla B,
    3. Lucio-Palacio CR,
    4. Libreros LL,
    5. Sánchez-Velásquez LR,
    6. Inzunza ER

    . 2018. Mexico’s official reforestation programs are shrinking and narrowing its vision at a higher financial expense. Forest Policy and Economics 94:32–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.06.006

    OpenUrl
21. ↵
    1. Sanderson EW,
    2. Jaiteh M,
    3. Levy MA,
    4. Redford KH,
    5. Wannebo AV,
    6. Woolmer G

    . 2002. The human footprint and the last of the wild. BioScience 52:891–904. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0891:THFATL]2.0.CO;2

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
22. ↵
    1. Tennekes T

    . 2017. Treemap: treemap visualization. R package version 2.4–2.

    OpenUrl
23. ↵
    University of Minnesota. 2020. Plant Information Online. Minneapolis (MN): University of Minnesota Libraries. https://plantinfo.umn.edu/
24. ↵
    [USDA NRCS] USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2020. The PLANTS database. URL: https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/ (accessed 2020). Greensboro (NC): National Plant Data Team.
25. ↵
    1. Vidal CY,
    2. Naves RP,
    3. Viani RAG,
    4. Rodrigues RR

    . 2020. Assessment of the nursery species pool for restoring landscapes in southeastern Brazil. Restoration Ecology 28:427–434. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13096

    OpenUrl
26. ↵
    1. White A

    . 2016. From nursery to nature: evaluating native herbaceous flowering plants versus native cultivars for pollinator habitat restoration. Graduate College Dissertations and Theses 626. URL: https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/graddis/626. Burlington (VT): University of Vermont.
27. ↵
    1. White A,
    2. Fant JB,
    3. Havens K,
    4. Skinner M,
    5. Kramer AT

    . 2018. Restoring species diversity: assessing capacity in the U.S. native plant industry. Restoration Ecology 26:605–611. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12705

    OpenUrl
28. ↵
    1. Zaya DN,
    2. Leicht-Young SA,
    3. Pavlovic NB,
    4. Hetrea CS,
    5. Ashley MV

    . 2017. Mislabeling of an invasive vine (Celastrus orbiculatus) as a native congener (C. scandens) in horticulture. Invasive Plant Science and Management 10:313–321. https://doi.org/10.1017/inp.2017.37

    OpenUrl