4.0 Article

Effective suppression of established invasive Phragmites australis leads to secondary invasion in a coastal marsh

期刊

INVASIVE PLANT SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT
卷 14, 期 1, 页码 9-19

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/inp.2021.2

关键词

European common reed; herbicide control; invasive plant; vegetation community; wetland

资金

  1. NSERC [RGPIN-2014-03846]
  2. MNRF [MNRF-W-(12)3-16]
  3. Ontario Graduate Scholarship (OGS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study successfully suppressed Phragmites australis populations using a glyphosate-based herbicide, but the vegetation community remained distinct from reference conditions two years after treatment.
Invasive species negatively impact vegetation communities. Invasive European common reed [Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steud. ssp. australis] is rapidly spreading throughout North American wetlands. As such, the suppression of P. australis populations is a goal of many managers, as its removal should provide an opportunity to restore native vegetation communities. In Ontario, managers applied a glyphosate-based herbicide to more than 400 ha of P. australis in ecologically significant coastal marshes, representing the first time this tool was used over standing water to suppress an invasive species in Canada. Using a before-after-control-impact monitoring design, we evaluated the efficacy of glyphosate-based herbicide at removing P. australis along a water-depth gradient and assessed the recovery of the vegetation community for 2 yr after treatment in relation to reference conditions. We found that herbicide suppressed more than 99% of P. australis 1 yr after treatment and worked effectively along the entire water-depth gradient (10 to 48 cm). However, the post-treatment vegetation community remains distinctive from reference marsh 2 yr after treatment. In many plots where P. australis was removed, nonnative European frog-bit (Hydrocharis morsus-ranae L.) is now dominant, likely aided by high lake-water levels.

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