4.4 Article

Floods reduce the prevalence of exotic plant species within the riparian zone: evidence from natural floods

期刊

APPLIED VEGETATION SCIENCE
卷 18, 期 3, 页码 503-512

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/avsc.12156

关键词

Environmental flows; Exotic weeds; Natural experiment; Natural flow regime; Riparian vegetation

资金

  1. Melbourne Research Scholarship
  2. eWater top-up scholarship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

QuestionsDoes flooding reduce the prevalence of exotic plant species and promote native riparian plant species? LocationField study, two regulated lowland rivers, SE Australia. MethodsWe used a large flood in spring to test predictions of vegetation response to flooding. We predicted that the species richness of exotic taxa (mostly terrestrial annual/biennial grasses and forbs in the study systems) would be reduced by flooding, while the richness of native riparian species adapted to fluvial disturbance would increase. We surveyed the riparian vegetation at three sites on each of two regulated rivers in the summers before and after a large flood in early spring that inundated all of the sites on one river, and one site on the other river; the remaining sites were not flooded. Overall, the study was a natural experiment with a before-after control-impact design. ResultsAs predicted, flooding dramatically reduced the richness of exotic taxa, particularly of terrestrial grasses. However, some invasive flood-tolerant exotic taxa, such as blackberries and willows, were promoted by the floods. Flooding reduced the cover of most native taxa, but did not affect overall native taxon richness. In contrast, the richness and cover of native summer annuals increased following the flood. ConclusionsOur study provides evidence to support the use of managed floods to reduce the prevalence of terrestrial exotic taxa within the riparian zones of regulated rivers. The frequency and intensity of flow pulses necessary to keep terrestrial exotics at low levels requires further research.

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

4.4
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