Advertisement

Population biology of the annual grassTriplasis purpurea in relation to distance from shore on Staten Island, New York

  • Cheplick Gregory P. 
  • Demetri Harry 
Article

Abstract

Four populations of the native annual grassTriplasis purpurea were surveyed on coastal beaches along the south shore of Staten Island, NY, to determine the potential of this species to colonize shoreline habitats mostly devoid of other vegetation. If the species can establish and maintain dense populations, it may have conservation value for urban beaches disturbed by human activities. For two populations, survivorship, growth, and reproduction were monitored at different distances from shore to determine the ability of this species to maintain viable populations. At three sites,T. purpurea occurred in >75% of all quadrats and the highest density was 1195 plants/m2 at 74 m from shore in one recently disturbed site. Density generally increased with increasing distances from shore at low tide (from ca. 40 – 90 m). Plants showed the greatest growth and reproduction at close distances to shore (30 – 40 m); part of this effect was due to density in one population, but when density effects were removed statistically, there still remained a decline in growth and reproduction with increasing distance from shore. Improved vigor nearest to shore may be due to continual sand deposition. Survivorship showed a Type I pattern, with low mortality throughout the growing season. By colonizing newly-deposited and continually shifting sands,T. purpurea can contribute to the earliest stages of ecological succession along disturbed beaches in eastern North America and may be valuable to the development and management of urban coastal plant communities.

Keywords

Coastal beach Colonization Psammophyte Seed production Survivorship 

References

  1. Barbour, M.G., de Jong, T.M. & Pavlik, B.M. 1985. Marine beach and dune plant communities. In: Chabot, B.F. & Mooney, H.A. (eds.)Physiological ecology of North American plant communities, pp. 296–322. Chapman & Hall, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  2. Bazzaz, F.A. & Morse, S.R. 1991. Annual plants: potential responses to multiple stresses. In: Mooney, H.A., Winner, W.E. & Pell, E.J. (eds.)Responses of plants to multiple stresses, pp. 283–305. Academic Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  3. Bertness, M.D. 1999.The ecology of Atlantic shorelines. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, MA.Google Scholar
  4. Bonanno, S.E., Leopold, D.J. & Hilaire, L.R. 1998. Vegetation of a freshwater dune barrier under high and low recreational uses.J. Torrey Bot. Soc. 125: 40–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bonham, C.D. 1989.Measurements for terrestrial vegetation. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  6. Boyce, S.G. 1954. The salt spray community.Ecol. Monogr. 24: 29–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bullock, J. 1996. Plants. In: Sutherland, W.J. (ed.)Ecological census techniques: a handbook, pp. 111–138. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  8. Burden, R.F. & Randerson, P.F. 1972. Quantitative studies of the effects of human trampling on vegetation as an aid to the management of semi-natural areas.J. Appl. Ecol. 9: 439–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carlson, L.H. & Godfrey, P.J. 1989. Human impact management in a coastal recreation and natural area.Biol. Conserv. 49: 141–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Castillo, S.A. & Moreno-Casasola, P. 1996. Coastal sand dune vegetation: an extreme case of species invasion.J. Coastal Conserv. 2: 13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chase, A. 1918. Axillary cleistogenes in some American grasses.Am. J. Bot. 5: 254–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cheplick, G.P. 1996a. Cleistogamy and seed heteromorphism inTriplasis purpurea (Poaceae).Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 123: 25–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cheplick, G.P. 1996b. Do seed germination patterns in cleistogamous annual grasses reduce the risk of sibling competition?J. Ecol. 84: 247–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cheplick, G.P. 1998. Seed dispersal and seedling establishment in grass populations. In: Cheplick, G.P. (ed.)Population biology of grasses, pp. 84–105. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  15. Cheplick, G.P. & Demetri, H. 1999. Impact of saltwater spray and sand deposition on the coastal annualTriplasis purpurea (Poaceae).Am. J. Bot. 86: 703–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cheplick, G.P. & Grandstaff, K. 1997. Effects of sand burial on purple sandgrass (Triplasis purpurea): the significance of seed heteromorphism.Plant Ecol. 133: 79–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cheplick, G.P. & Wickstrom, V.M. 1999. Assessing the potential for competition on a coastal beach and the significance of variable seed mass inTriplasis purpurea.J. Torrey Bot. Soc. 126: 296–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cook, R.P. & Tanacredi, J.T. 1990. Management strategies for increasing habitat and species diversity in an urban national park. In:Ecosystem management: rare species and significant habitats, pp. 248–250. New York State Museum Bull. 471.Google Scholar
  19. Davis, J.H. 1956. Influences of man upon coast lines. In: Thomas, W.L., Sauer, C.O., Bates, M. & Mumford, L. (eds.)Man’s role in changing the face of the earth, pp. 504–521. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  20. Day, R.W. & Quinn, G.P. 1989. Comparisons of treatments after an analysis of variance in ecology.Ecol. Monogr. 59: 433–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Deevey, E.S. 1947. Life tables for natural populations of animals.Quart. Rev. Biol. 22: 283–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dowdy, S. & Wearden, S. 1991.Statistics for research. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  23. Duncan, W.H. & Duncan, M.B. 1987.The Smithsonian guide to seaside plants of the Gulf and Atlantic coasts from Louisiana to Massachusetts, exclusive of lower Peninsular Florida. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  24. Eriksson, E. & Ehrlen, J. 1992. Seed and microsite limitation of recruitment in plant populations.Oecologia (Berl.) 91: 360–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fox, G.A. 1993. Failure-time analysis: emergence, flowering, survivorship, and other waiting times. In: Scheiner, S.M. & Gurevitch, J. (eds.)Design and analysis of ecological experiments, pp. 253–289. Chapman & Hall, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  26. Hesp, P.A. 1991. Ecological processes and plant adaptations on coastal dunes.J. Arid. Environ. 21: 165–191.Google Scholar
  27. Hitchcock, A.S. 1950.Manual of the grasses of the United States, 2nd ed. (revised by A. Chase). United States Department of Agriculture Miscellaneous Publication 200, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  28. Hosier, P.E. & Eaton, T.E. 1980. The impact of vehicles on dune and grassland vegetation on a southeastern North Carolina barrier beach.J. Appl. Ecol. 17: 173–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jefferies, R.L., Davy, A.J. & Rudmik, T. 1981. Population biology of the salt marsh annualSalicornia europaea agg.J. Ecol. 69: 17–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Keddy, P.A. 1981. Experimental demography of the sand-dune annual,Cakile edentula, growing along an environmental gradient in Nova Scotia.J. Ecol. 69: 615–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Liddle, M.J. & Greig-Smith, P. 1975. A survey of tracks and paths in a sand dune ecosystem. II. Vegetation.J. Appl. Ecol. 12: 909–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mack, R.N. 1976. Survivorship ofCerastium atrovirens at Aberffraw, Anglesey.J. Ecol. 64: 309–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mack, R.N. & Pyke, D.A. 1983. The demography ofBromus tectorum: variation in space and time.J. Ecol. 71: 69–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Maun, M.A. 1994. Adaptations enhancing survival and establishment of seedlings on coastal dune systems.Vegetatio 111: 59–70.Google Scholar
  35. Maun, M.A. 1998. Adaptations of plants to burial in coastal sand dunes.Can. J. Bot. 76: 713–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McDonnell, M.J. 1981. Trampling effects on coastal dune vegetation in the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge, Massachusetts, USA.Biol. Conserv. 21: 289–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Muenchow, G. 1986. Ecological use of failure time analysis.Ecology 67: 246–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Oosting, H.J. & Billings, W.D. 1942. Factors effecting [sic] vegetational zonation on coastal dunes.Ecology 23: 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ozturk, M. 1999. Urban ecology and land degradation. In: Farina, A. (ed.)Perspectives in ecology, pp. 115–120. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden.Google Scholar
  40. Pyke, D.A. & Thompson, J.N. 1986. Statistical analysis of survival and removal rate experiments.Ecology 67: 240–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sokal, R.R. & Rohlf, F.J. 1981.Biometry. W.H. Freeman, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  42. Stalter, R. 1993. Dry coastal ecosystems of the eastern United States of America. In: van der Maarel, E. (ed.)Dry Coastal Ecosystems: Africa, America, Asia and Oceania, pp. 317–340. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  43. Stalter, R., Byer, M.D. & Tanacredi, J.T. 1996. Rare and endangered plants at Gateway National Recreation Area: a case for protection of urban natural areas.Landscape Urban Plan. 35: 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Symonides, E. 1988. Population dynamics of annual plants. In: Davy, A.J., Hutchings, M.J. & Watkinson, A.R. (eds.)Plant population ecology, pp. 221–248. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford.Google Scholar
  45. Tanacredi, J.T. 1983. Coastal zone management practices at an urban national park.Environ. Manage. 7: 143–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tanacredi, J.T. 1987. Natural resource management policy constraints and trade-offs in an urban national recreation area. In: Adams, L.W. & Leedy, D.L. (eds.)Integrating man and nature in the metropolitan environment, pp. 221–227. National Institute for Urban Wildlife, Columbia, MD.Google Scholar
  47. Underwood, A.J. 1997.Experiments in ecology: their logical design and interpretation using analysis of variance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  48. van der Valk, A.G. 1974. Environmental factors controlling the distribution of forbs on coastal foredunes in Cape Hatteras National Seashore.Can. J. Bot. 52: 1057–1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Watkinson, A.R. 1990. The population dynamics ofVulpia fasciculata: a nine-year study.J. Ecol. 78: 196–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Watkinson, A.R. & Davy, A.J. 1985. Population biology of salt marsh and sand dune annuals.Vegetatio 62: 487–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Watkinson, A.R. & Harper, J.L. 1978. The demography of a sand dune annual:Vulpia fasciculata. I. The natural regulation of populations.J. Ecol. 66: 15–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Watkinson, A.R., Huiskes, A.H.L. & Noble, J.C. 1979. The demography of sand dune species with contrasting life cycles. In: Jefferies, R.L. & Davy, A.J. (eds.)Ecological processes in coastal environments, pp. 95–112. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford.Google Scholar
  53. Woodhouse, W.W. Jr. 1982. Coastal sand dunes of the U.S. In: Lewis, R.R. III (ed.)Creation and restoration of coastal plant communities, pp. 1–44. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© EUCC 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biology, College of Staten IslandCity University of New YorkStaten IslandUSA

Personalised recommendations