Advertisement

Wetlands Ecology and Management

, Volume 27, Issue 2–3, pp 283–293 | Cite as

Passerine and secretive marsh bird responses to cattail management in temperate wetlands

  • Sarah L. Anderson
  • Devan Allen McGranahanEmail author
  • Torre J. Hovick
  • Anthony R. Hewitt
Original Paper

Abstract

Hybrid cattails (Typha x glauca) are an invasive, emergent aquatic plant that often form monodominant stands, which can alter wetland vegetation structure and negatively affect wildlife populations. Wetland managers often apply prescribed burning, grazing, and herbicide treatments to reduce cattail density but how these management actions influence wetland wildlife is largely unknown. Our objectives were to investigate the effect of hybrid cattail control methods on secretive marsh bird and wetland passerine abundance in central Minnesota, USA. Specifically, we assessed how environmental variables and cattail treatments (e.g., burning, grazing, and herbicide) influenced bird densities and community composition. We used the North American Marsh Bird Monitoring Protocol to assess wetland bird communities across sixteen wetlands comprised of eight treatments with a full-factorial design. Species-specific density estimates and community-wide ordination offered little evidence for a substantial effect of treatments on marsh birds and passerines. However, gradients in vegetation height and mean biomass did have a significant relationship with both passerine and marsh bird community composition, which suggests changes in the bird community following cattail management might require time to develop. To support diverse wetland bird communities, treatments must create contrast among wetland habitats with high and low vegetative biomass. Because secretive marsh birds are under-surveyed, our baseline population estimates are valuable for future local and regional management and for gaining preliminary understanding of the effect of invasive species management on wetland birds in the Upper Midwest.

Keywords

Distance sampling Fire and grazing wetland management Hybrid cattail management Secretive marsh birds Wetland bird community composition 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We appreciate the support of the US Fish and Wildlife Service and Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge; Great River Greening for grant administration; and the North Dakota State Agricultural Experiment Station. The Minnesota Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program provided funding assistance. We appreciate contributions from D. Sapp, R. Donaldson, and N. Peay.

Funding

Minnesota Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program

References

  1. Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67:1–48.  https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Batzer DP (2013) The seemingly intractable ecological responses of invertebrates in North American wetlands: A review. Wetlands 33:1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-012-0360-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boers AM, Zedler JB (2008) Stabilized water levels and Typha invasiveness. Wetlands 28:676–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brinson MM, Malvárez AI (2002) Temperate freshwater wetlands: types, status, and threats. Environ Conserv 29:115–133.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892902000085 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buckland ST (2001) Introduction to Distance Sampling: Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  6. Budd MJ (2007) Status, Distribution, and Habitat Selection of Secretive Marsh Birds in the Delta of Arkansas. University of Arkansas, ThesisGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen H, Qian H, Spyreas G, Crossland M (2010) Native-exotic species richness relationships across spatial scales and biotic homogenization in wetland plant communities of Illinois, USA. Divers Distrib 16:737–743.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00679.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Colwell MA, Taft OW (2000) Waterbird Communities in Managed Wetlands of Varying Water Depth. Waterbirds Int J Waterbird Biol 23:45–55Google Scholar
  9. Conway CJ (2011) Standardized North American Marsh Bird Monitoring Protocol. Waterbirds 34:319–346.  https://doi.org/10.1675/063.034.0307 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Conway CJ, Gibbs JP (2011) Summary of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Factors Affecting Detection Probability of Marsh Birds. Wetlands 31:403–411.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-011-0155-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Conway CJ, Nadeau CP, Piest L (2010) Fire helps restore natural disturbance regime to benefit rare and endangered marsh birds endemic to the Colorado River. Ecol Appl 20:2024–2035.  https://doi.org/10.1890/09-1624.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cummings DC, Fuhlendorf SD, Engle DM (2007) Is altering grazing selectivity of invasive forage species with patch burning more effective than herbicide treatments? Rangel Ecol Manag 60:253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dahl TE (2014) Status and trends of prairie wetlands in the United States 1997 to 2009. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  14. Elgersma KJ, Martina JP, Goldberg DE, Currie WS (2017) Effectiveness of cattail (Typha spp.) management techniques depends on exogenous nitrogen inputs. Elem Sci Anthr 5:19 pp. doi: http://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.147
  15. ESRI (2015) ArcGIS 10.3. Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), Redlands, CAGoogle Scholar
  16. Fairbairn SE, Dinsmore JJ (2001) Local and landscape-level influences on wetland bird communities of the prairie pothole region of Iowa, USA. Wetlands 21:41–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Farrer EC, Goldberg DE (2009) Litter drives ecosystem and plant community changes in cattail invasion. Ecol Appl 19:398–412.  https://doi.org/10.1890/08-0485.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Farrer EC, Goldberg DE (2014) Mechanisms and reversibility of the effects of hybrid cattail on a Great Lakes marsh. Aquat Bot 116:35–43.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquabot.2014.01.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fredrickson LH (1991) Strategies for water level manipulations in moist-soil systems. Fish Wildl Leafl 13.4.6:26 ppGoogle Scholar
  20. Gabrey SW, Afton AD, Wilson BC (1999) Effects of winter burning and structural marsh management on vegetation and winter bird abundance in the Gulf Coast Chenier Plain, USA. Wetlands 19:594–606.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03161697 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gibbs JP (2000) Wetland Loss and Biodiversity Conservation. Conserv Biol 14:314–317.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98608.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Glisson WJ, Brady RS, Paulios AT, Jacobi SK, Larkin DJ (2015) Sensitivity of secretive marsh birds to vegetation condition in natural and restored wetlands in Wisconsin. J Wildl Manag 79:1101–1116.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.937 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Glisson WJ, Conway CJ, Nadeau CP, Borgmann KL (2017) Habitat models to predict wetland bird occupancy influenced by scale, anthropogenic disturbance, and imperfect detection. Ecosphere 8:e01837.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1837 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Grant TA, Shaffer TL, Madden EM, Berkey GB (2011) Ducks and passerines nesting in northern mixed-grass prairie treated with fire. Wildl Soc Bull 35:368–376.  https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.65 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gray MJ, Hagy HM, Nyman JA, Stafford JD (2013) Management of wetlands for wildlife. In: Anderson JT, Davis CA (eds) Wetland Techniques: Volume 3: Applications and Management. Springer, pp 121–180Google Scholar
  26. Harms TM, Dinsmore SJ (2012) Density and Abundance of Secretive Marsh Birds in Iowa. Waterbirds 35:208–216.  https://doi.org/10.1675/063.035.0203 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Harms TM, Dinsmore SJ (2013) Habitat associations of secretive marsh birds in Iowa. Wetlands 33:561–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Harms TM, Dinsmore SJ (2015) Density, abundance, and habitat associations of the inland Swamp Sparrow (Melospiza georgiana georgiana) in Iowa. Wilson J Ornithol 127:670–677.  https://doi.org/10.1676/15-001.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Harms TM, Dinsmore SJ (2016) Spatial scale matters when modeling avian co-occurrence. Ecosphere 7:e01288-n/a.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1288
  30. Hentges VA, Stewart TW (2010) Macroinvertebrate Assemblages in Iowa Prairie Pothole Wetlands and Relation to Environmental Features. Wetlands 30:501–511.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-010-0058-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hothorn T, Bretz F, Westfall P (2008) Simultaneous Inference in General Parametric Models. Biom J 50:346–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Johnson R, Dinsmore JJ (1986) Habitat Use by Breeding Virginia Rails and Soras. J Wildl Manag 50:387–392.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3801092 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kirsch EM, Gray BR, Fox TJ, Thogmartin WE (2007) Breeding bird territory placement in riparian wet meadows in relation to invasive reed canary grass, Phalaris arundinacea. Wetlands 27:644–655.  https://doi.org/10.1672/0277-5212(2007)27%5b644:BBTPIR%5d2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kostecke RM, Smith LM, Hands HM (2004) Vegetation response to cattail management at Cheyenne Bottoms, Kansas. J Aquat Plant Manag 42:39–45Google Scholar
  35. Krapu GL, Klett AT, Jorde DG (1983) The effect of variable spring water conditions on mallard reproduction. Auk 100:689–698Google Scholar
  36. Kruskal JB (1964) Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: a numerical method. Psychometrika 29:115–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Larkin DJ, Freyman MJ, Lishawa SC, Geddes P, Tuchman NC (2011) Mechanisms of dominance by the invasive hybrid cattail Typha × glauca. Biol Invasions 14:65–77.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-011-0059-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lawrence BA, Lishawa SC, Rodriguez Y, Tuchman NC (2016) Herbicide management of invasive cattail (Typha × glauca) increases porewater nutrient concentrations. Wetl Ecol Manag 24:457–467.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-015-9471-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Linz GM, Homan HJ (2011) Use of glyphosate for managing invasive cattail (Typha spp.) to disperse blackbird (Icteridae) roosts. Crop Prot 30:98–104.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2010.10.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Linz GM, Blixt DC, Bergman DL, Bleier WJ (1996) Responses of Red-Winged Blackbirds, Yellow-Headed Blackbirds and Marsh Wrens to Glyphosate-Induced Alterations in Cattail Density. J Field Ornithol 67:167–176Google Scholar
  41. Lishawa SC, Lawrence BA, Albert DA, Tuchman NC (2015) Biomass harvest of invasive Typha promotes plant diversity in a Great Lakes coastal wetland: Harvesting Typha promotes plant diversity. Restor Ecol 23:228–237.  https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12167 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ma Z, Cai Y, Li B, Chen J (2010) Managing wetland habitats for waterbirds: An international perspective. Wetlands 30:15–27.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-009-0001-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Manci KM, Rusch DH (1988) Indices to Distribution and Abundance of Some Inconspicuous Waterbirds on Horicon Marsh. J Field Ornithol 59:67–75Google Scholar
  44. Mazerolle MJ (2016) AICcmodavg: Model Selection and Multimodel Inference Based on (Q)AIC(c)Google Scholar
  45. Mitsch WJ, Hernandez ME (2012) Landscape and climate change threats to wetlands of North and Central America. Aquat Sci 75:133–149.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00027-012-0262-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Friendly M, Kindt R, Legendre P, McGlinn D, Minchin PR, O’Hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Szoecs E, Wagner H (2016) vegan: Community Ecology PackageGoogle Scholar
  47. Olson EJ, Engstrom ES, Doeringsfeld MR, Bellig R (1995) Abundance and distribution of macroinvertebrates in relation to macrophyte communities in a prairie marsh, Swan Lake, Minnesota. J Freshw Ecol 10:325–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Panci H (2013) Habitat and landscape characteristics that influence sedge wren (Cistothorus platensis) and marsh wren (C. palustris) distribution and abundance in great lakes coastal wetlands. M.S., University of MinnesotaGoogle Scholar
  49. Qian H, Guo Q (2010) Linking biotic homogenization to habitat type, invasiveness and growth form of naturalized alien plants in North America. Divers Distrib 16:119–125.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2009.00627.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. R Core Team (2016) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  51. Reis V, Hermoso V, Hamilton SK, Ward D, Fluet-Chouinard E, Lehner B, Linke S (2017) A global assessment of inland wetland conservation status. Bioscience 67:523–533.  https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bix045 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Smith LM, Kadlec JA (1985) Fire and Herbivory in a Great Salt Lake Marsh. Ecology 66:259–265.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1941326 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Solberg KL, Higgins KF (1993) Effects of Glyphosate Herbicide on Cattails, Invertebrates, and Waterfowl in South Dakota Wetlands. Wildl Soc Bull 1973–2006(21):299–307Google Scholar
  54. Thomas L, Buckland ST, Rexstad EA, Laake JL, Strindberg S, Hedley SL, Bishop JRB, Marques TA, Burnham KP (2010) Distance software: design and analysis of distance sampling surveys for estimating population size. J Appl Ecol 47:5–14.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01737.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. USFWS (2005) SNWF Comprehensive Conservation PlanGoogle Scholar
  56. Vaccaro LE, Bedford BL, Johnston CA (2009) Litter accumulation promotes dominance of invasive species of cattails (Typha spp.) in Lake Ontario wetlands. Wetlands 29:1036–1048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. van der Valk AG (2005) Water-level fluctuations in North American prairie wetlands. Hydrobiologia 539:171–188.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-004-4866-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wilcox DA, Buckler K, Czayka A (2017) Controlling cattail invasion in sedge/grass meadows. Wetlands in press.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-017-0971-8
  59. Wiltermuth MT, Anteau MJ (2016) Is consolidation drainage an indirect mechanism for increased abundance of cattail in northern prairie wetlands? Wetl Ecol Manag 24:533–544.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-016-9485-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zedler JB, Kercher S (2004) Causes and consequences of invasive plants in wetlands: Opportunities, opportunists, and outcomes. Crit Rev Plant Sci 23:431–452.  https://doi.org/10.1080/07352680490514673 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School for Natural Resource Sciences—Range Science ProgramNorth Dakota State UniversityFargoUSA
  2. 2.US Fish and Wildlife ServiceBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations