4.3 Article

The invasion of a large lake by the Eurasian genotype of common reed: The influence of roads and residential construction

期刊

JOURNAL OF GREAT LAKES RESEARCH
卷 36, 期 3, 页码 554-560

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2010.06.001

关键词

Freshwater; Haplotype M; Lake; Phragmites australis; Residential construction; Road

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  2. Frontenac National Park

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Eurasian genotype of common reed (Phragmites australis) is one of the most aggressive plant invading North American wetlands. There is, however, little published evidence on establishment patterns of populations along lakes of the St. Lawrence River Great Lakes watershed. We tested the hypothesis that the recent invasion of Great Lake Saint-Francois (Quebec, Canada) by common reed was facilitated by a dense road system and by an intense residence construction activity along lakeshores. A total of 345 and 2914 reed stands were mapped along lakeshores, and along the road system of the study area, respectively. The probability of finding a reed stand on a lakeshore increases with the proximity of the lake's outlet, and of a paved road, but decreases with the proximity of a residence built since 1990. It is likely that common reed first spread along the road system, and that wind dispersal of seeds then favored the establishment of populations on lakeshores. Our model does not support the hypothesis that residential construction facilitated the establishment of reed stands, probably because the recent residential construction boom occurred essentially in the southern part of the lake, where the number of roadside reed populations is much lower than in the northern part (lower seed rain). The invasion of Great Lake Saint-Francois shows that the spread of the plant is not restricted to major river or road systems. Large or small lakes, if submitted to intense diaspore pressure, can also be at risk. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据