Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

High Reinvasion Potential of Phragmites australis in a Delaware River (USA) Tidal Freshwater Marsh Following Chemical Treatment: the Role of the Seedbank

  • Applied Wetland Science
  • Published:
Wetlands Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Management of the invasive Phragmites australis haplotype has focused on controlling its abundance in wetlands where it reduces biodiversity. However, little information is available on establishment of native communities and reinvasion by seed following removal using herbicides. The potential for reinvasion and development of native vegetation were evaluated using a seedbank assay and a vegetation survey along gradients from the channel edge to the marsh interior (0, 5 and 20 m distance) in three tidal freshwater marsh sites - Natural, treatment 6 months prior (Treated), and untreated (Phragmites). Recolonization potential from the seedbank was high with >18,500 seedlings m−2 in Treated samples. Richness and density of native species were low in the interior of Treated and Phragmites sites as compared to the Natural marsh. Few species were present in Treated site vegetation 11 months following treatment where P. australis litter comprised a large proportion of the cover. Results indicate that planting native vegetation to outcompete P. australis seedlings and total removal of P. australis to cut off the seed supply may be necessary for successful longer-term restoration and establishment of native species.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Seedling data is in the Supplemental Table and vegetation data is available upon request.

References

  • Ailstock MS, Norman CM, Bushmann PJ (2001) Common reed Phragmites australis: control and effects upon biodiversity in freshwater nontidal wetlands. Restoration Ecology 9:49–59. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-100x.2001.009001049.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amsberry L, Baker MA, Ewanchuk PJ, Bertness MD (2000) Clonal integration and the expansion of Phragmites australis. Ecological Applications 10:1110–1118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong J, Armstrong W, Beckett PM (1992) Phragmites australis: Venturi- and humidity-induced pressure flows enhance rhizome aeration and rhizosphere oxidation. New Phytologist 120:197–207. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1992.tb05655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin AH, Kettering KM, Whigham DF (2010) Seed banks of Phragmites australis-dominated brackish wetlands: relationships to seed viability, inundation, and land cover. Aquatic Botany 93:163–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bart D, Hartman JM (2002) Environmental constraints on early establishment of Phragmites australis in salt marshes. Wetlands 22:201–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bart D, Hartman JM (2003) The role of large rhizome dispersal and low salinity windows in the establishment of common reed, Phragmites australis, in salt marshes: new links to human activities. Estuaries and Coasts 26:436–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belzile F, Labbé J, LeBlanc M, Lavoie C (2010) Seeds contribute strongly to the spread of the invasive genotype of the common reed (Phragmites australis). Biological Invasions 12:2243–2250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9634-x

  • Benoit LK, Askins RA (1999) Impact of the spread of Phragmites on the distribution of birds in Connecticut tidal marshes. Wetlands 19:194–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03161749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brower JE, Zar JH, vonEnde CN (1998) Field and laboratory methods for general ecology, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson ML, Kowalski KP, Wilcox DA (2009) Promoting species establishment in a Phragmites-dominated Great Lakes coastal wetland. Natural Areas Journal 29:263–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke KR, Gorley RN (2006) PRIMER v6: User Manual/Tutorial. PRIMER-E, Plymouth, England

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke KR, Warwick RM (2001) Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation, 2nd edn. PRIMER-E, Plymouth, England

    Google Scholar 

  • Colello J Jr (2013) Let’s go to the White City: a history of White City Amusement Park, Hamilton, NJ. Archway Publishing

  • Elsey-Quirk T, Leck MA (2015) Patterns of seed bank and vegetation diversity along a tidal freshwater river. Americam Journal of Botany 102:1996–2012

  • Galatowitsch SM, Anderson NO, Ascher PD (1999) Invasiveness in wetland plants in temperate North America. Wetlands 19:733–755. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03161781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galatowitsch SM, Larson DL, Larson JL (2016) Factors affecting post-control reinvasion by seed of an invasive species, Phragmites australis, in the Central Platte River, Nebraska. Biol Invasions 18:2505–2516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-015-1048-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallinger KD, Shisler JK (2009) Seed bank colonization in tidal wetlands following Phragmites control (New Jersey). Ecological Restoration 27:16–18

  • Hazelton ELG, Downard R, Kettenring KM, McCormick MK, Whigham DF (2018) Spatial and temporal variation in brackish wetland seedbanks: implications for wetland restoration following Phragmites control. Estuaries and Coasts 41:68–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hazelton ELG, Mozdzer TJ, Burdick DM, Kettenring KM, Whigham DF (2014) Phragmites australis management in the United States: 40 years of methods and outcomes. AoB PLANTS 6: plu001. https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/plu001

  • Hobbs RJ, Humphries SE (1995) An integrated approach to the ecology and management of plant invasions. Conservation Biology 9:761–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller BEM (2000) Plant diversity in Lythrum, Phragmites, and Typha marshes, Massachusetts, U.S.a. Wetlands Ecology Management 8:391–401. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1026505817409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kettenring KM, Adams CR (2011) Lessons learned from invasive plant control experiments: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Ecology 48:970–979

  • Kettenring KM, McCormick MK, Baron HM, Whigham DF (2011) Mechanisms of Phragmites australis invasion: feedbacks among genetic diversity, nutrients, and sexual reproduction. Journal of Applied Ecology 48:1305–1313. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02024.x

  • Kettenring KM, Mock KE (2012) Genetic diversity, reproductive mode, and dispersal differ between the cryptic invader, Phragmites australis, and its native conspecific. Biol Invasions 14:2489–2504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-012-0246-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kettenring KM, Whigham D (2009) Seed viability and seed dormancy of non-native Phragmites australis in suburbanized and forested watershed of the Chesapeake Bay, USA. Aquatic Botany 91:199–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kettenring KM, Whigham D, Hazelton ELG, Gallagher SK, Weiner HM (2015) Biotic resistance, disturbance, and mode of colonization impact the invasion of a widespread, introduced wetland grass. Ecological Applications 25:466–480

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kettenring KM, Whigham DF (2018) The role of propagule type, resource availability, and seed source in Phragmites invasion in Chesapeake Bay wetlands. Wetlands 38:1259–1268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-018-1034-5

  • Leck MA (1996) Germination of macrophytes from a Delaware River wetland. Biological Torrey Botanical Club 123:48–67

  • Leck MA (2003) Seed-bank and vegetation development in a created tidal freshwater wetland on the Delaware River, Trenton, New Jersey, USA. Wetlands 23:310–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leck MA (2013) Dispersal potential of a tidal river and colonization of a created tidal freshwater marsh. AoB PLANTS (Oxford Univ. Press online journal)(special issue regarding Phragmites australis). (pls050) AoB PLANTS 5: pls050. https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/pls050

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leck MA, Graveline KJ (1979) The seed bank of a freshwater tidal marsh. American Journal of Botany 66:1006–1015

  • Leck MA, Simpson RL (1987) Seed bank of a freshwater tidal wetland: turnover and relationship to vegetation change. Am J Botany 74(3):360–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leck MA, Simpson RL (1994) Tidal freshwater wetland zonation: seed and seedling dynamics. Aquatic Botany 47:61–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leck MA, Simpson RL (1995) Ten-year seed bank and vegetation dynamics of a tidal freshwater wetland. American Journal of Botany 82:1547–1557

  • Leck MA, Simpson RL, Whigham DF, Leck CF (1988) Plants of the Hamilton marshes, a Delaware River freshwater tidal wetland. Bartonia 54:1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Marks M, Lapin B, Randall J (1994) Phragmites australis (P. communis): threats, management and monitoring. Natural Areas Journal 14:285–294

  • Martin LJ, Blossey B (2013) The runaway weed: costs and failures of Phragmites australis management in the USA. Estuaries and Coasts 36:626–632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mauchamp A, Blanch S, Grillas P (2001) Effects of submergence on the growth of Phragmites australis seedlings. Aquatic Botany 69:147–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCormick MK, Kettenring KM, Baron HM, Whigham DF (2010) Extent and reproductive mechanisms of Phragmites australis spread in brackish wetlands in Chesapeake Bay, Maryland (USA). Wetlands 30:67–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson LA, Saltonstall K, Windham L, Kiviat E, Findlay S (2000) A comparison of Phragmites australis in freshwater and brackish marsh environments in North America. Wetlands Ecology and Management 8:89–103

  • Minchinton TE, Bertness MD (2003) Disturbance-mediated competition and the spread of Phragmites australis in a coastal marsh. Ecological Applications 13:1400–1416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minchinton TE, Simpson JC, Bertness MD (2006) Mechanisms of exclusion of native coastal marsh plants by an invasive grass. Journal of Ecology 94:342–354

  • Myers JH, Simberloff D, Kuris AM, Carey JR (2000) Eradication revisited: dealing with exotic species. Trends Ecology Evolution 15:316–320

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Neff KP, Rusello K, Baldwin AH (2009) Rapid seed bank development in restored tidal freshwater wetlands. Restoration Ecology 17(4):539–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Padgett DJ (2007) A monograph of Nuphar (Nymphaeaceae). Rhodora 109:1–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker VT, Leck MA (1985) Relationships of seed banks to plant distribution patterns in a freshwater tidal wetland. American Journal of Botany 72:161–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid AM, Morin L, Downey PO, French K, Virtue JG (2009) Does invasive plant management aid the restoration of natural ecosystems? Biological Conservation 142:2342–2349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohal CB, Cranney C, Kettenring KM (2019) Abiotic and landscape factors constrain restoration outcomes across spatial scales of a widespread invasive plant. Frontiers in Plant Science 10:481. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.00481

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rooth JE, Stevenson JC, Cornwell JC (2003) Increased sediment accretion rates following invasion by Phragmites australis: the role of litter. Estuaries Coasts 26:475–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saltonstall K (2002) Cryptic invasion by a non-native genotype of the common reed, Phragmites australis, into North America. Proceedings of the Natural Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99:2445–2449. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.032477999

  • Saltonstall K, Lambert A, Meyerson L (2010) Genetics and reproduction of common (Phragmites australis) and giant reed (Arundo donax). Invasive Plant Science and Management 3:495–505. https://doi.org/10.1614/IPSM-09-053.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson K, Bakker JP, Bekker RM (1997) The soil seed banks of North West Europe: methodology, density, and longevity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  • USDA ITIS (2020) https://www.208itis.gov/

  • van der Valk AG, Pederson RL (1989) Seedbanks and the management and restoration of natural vegetation. In: Leck MA (ed) 2012 Ecology of soil seedbanks. Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  • Whigham DF, Simpson RL (1975) Ecological studies of the Hamilton marshes, progress report for the period June 1974–January 1975. Rider College, Trenton, New Jersey, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • White TJ (2014) The effects of Phragmites australis litter on seed emergence in the Erie-Huron corridor, Michigan. Thesis. Wayne State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Windham L, Lathrop RG (1999) Effects of Phragmites australis (common reed) invasion on aboveground biomass and soil properties in brackish tidal marsh of the Mullica river, New Jersey. Estuaries 22:927–935. https://doi.org/10.2307/1353072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zedler JB, Kercher S (2004) Causes and consequences of invasive plants in wetlands: opportunities, opportunists, and outcomes. Critical Reviews Plant Sciences. 23:431–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Logistical support was provided by Mercer County Park Commission (Emily Blackman, Alexandria Kosowski, Alex Rivera, Jenn Rogers, Kelly Rypkema, and Jillian Stark) and NJ Department of Transportation (Jason Nowak); field help was provided by Kirk Raper and Nick Alpeza; Jen Scheibner and Alexis Windecker ably assisted with greenhouse duties. Rider University provided greenhouse space. Mark Gallagher from Princeton Hydro, Princeton, NJ provided treatment information. This research was funded by NSF Coastal SEES 1325466. We appreciate the careful reviews of two anonymous reviewers.

Funding

This research was funded by NSF Coastal SEES 1325466.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences, Louisiana State University, 3173 Energy, Coast, and Environment Building, Baton Rouge, LA, 70803, USA

    Tracy Elsey-Quirk

  2. Biology Department, Rider University, 2083 Lawrenceville Road, Lawrenceville, NJ, 08648, USA

    Mary Allessio Leck

Authors
  1. Tracy Elsey-Quirk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mary Allessio Leck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

T. Elsey-Quirk and M.A. Leck conceived of, designed and implemented the study and wrote the manuscript. M.A. Leck maintained the greenhouse and identified the seedlings. Field surveys were conducted by T. Elsey-Quirk and M.A Leck. T. Elsey-Quirk analyzed the data.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tracy Elsey-Quirk.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests

None.

Ethics Approval

Not applicable.

Consent to Participate

T. Elsey-Quirk and M.A. Leck consent to participate.

Consent for Publication

These results have not been published elsewhere.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

ESM 1

(DOCX 34.3 kb)

ESM 2

(DOCX 502 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Elsey-Quirk, T., Leck, M.A. High Reinvasion Potential of Phragmites australis in a Delaware River (USA) Tidal Freshwater Marsh Following Chemical Treatment: the Role of the Seedbank. Wetlands 41, 12 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-021-01398-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-021-01398-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation