4.0 Article

Do Woody Plants Prevent the Establishment of Common Reed along Highways? Insights from Southern Quebec

期刊

INVASIVE PLANT SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT
卷 6, 期 4, 页码 585-592

出版社

WEED SCI SOC AMER
DOI: 10.1614/IPSM-D-13-00025.1

关键词

Phragmites australis; plant competition; plant invasion; right-of-way management; road ecology

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  2. Department of Transportation of Quebec

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The common reed (Phragmites australis) is one of the most invasive vascular plants in northeastern North America. A competitive genotype from Eurasia has recently invaded road and agricultural ditches, which facilitate the dispersal of the plant over long distances. However, large tracts of roadsides-apparently propitious for the establishment of the plant-are not invaded by the grass. We hypothesized that the absence of the invader is associated with physical and biological characteristics of roadsides. To test this hypothesis, we collected field data and developed two statistical models to explain the presence or absence of the common reed along a highway of southern Quebec highly invaded by the plant but with contrasting patterns of common reed distribution. The models explained 23 to 30% of the total variance and correctly predicted the presence or absence of common reed 71% of the time. The models suggest that a dense woody plant cover over a drainage ditch limits the establishment and/or expansion of the common reed, probably by competition for light and space. Also, shaded ditches are not subjected to a frequent maintenance, and are therefore less disturbed, probably further reducing common reed invasion because the germination of their seeds is less likely without soil disturbance. This study yields insights on the potential of woody plants for controlling the expansion of invasive grasses, and could help to justify the preservation of dense shrubs and tree hedges along right-of-ways.

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

4.0
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