Advertisement

Wetlands

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 179–188 | Cite as

Comparison of biomass production and decomposition between Phragmites australis (common reed) and Spartina patens (salt hay grass) in brackish tidal marshes of New Jersey, USA

Article

Abstract

The recent expansion of Phragmites australis (common reed) from the marsh-upland interface into high marsh zones provides an opportunity to assess the impact of individual plant species on biomass production and decomposition in salt marshes. Seasonal harvests of aboveground and belowground biomass demonstrate that annual production of P. australis is approximately three times greater for aboveground biomass, two times greater for belowground biomass, and 30% lower in root: shoot ratio than neighboring populations of S. patens. Whole-plant litter (stems and leaves) also decomposes at a much slower annual rate for P. australis (k=0.25) than S. patents litter (k=0.57). By crossing litter type with site of litter decomposition, I found these plant species to influence decay rates through litter type and not through their effects on marsh surface conditions (e.g., temperature, sedimentation rates). Based on these calculations, annual rates of carbon accumulation in the peat of high marshes are likely to increase 5-fold once P. australis becomes established due to its greater rates of biomass production and residence time in infrequently flooded brackish marshes.

Key Words

macrophyte turnover litter carbon storage 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Abacus Concepts. 1996. Statview 4.1. Abacus Concepts, Inc. Berkeley, CA, USA.Google Scholar
  2. Amsberry, L., M. A. Baker, P. J. Ewanchuk, and M. D. Bertness. 2000. Clonal integration and the expansion of Phragmites australis. Ecological Applications 10:1110–1118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Armstrong, J. and W. Armstrong. 1991. A convective through-flow of gases in Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steud. Aquatic Botany 39:75–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bertness, M. D. 1991. Interspecific interactions among high marsh perennials in a New England salt marsh. Ecology 72:125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bertness, M. D. and A. M. Ellison. 1987. Determinants of pattern in a New England salt marsh community. Ecological Monographs 57:129–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blum, L. 1993. Spartina alterniflora root dynamics in a Virginia marsh. Marine Ecology Progress Series 102:169–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brinson, M. M., A. E. Lugo, and S. Brown. 1981. Primary productivity, decomposition, and consumer activity in freshwater wetlands. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 12:123–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chambers, R. M. 1997. Porewater chemistry associated with Phragmites and Spartina in a Connecticut tidal marsh. Wetlands 17: 360–367.Google Scholar
  9. Dacey, J. W. H. and B. L. Howes. 1984. Water uptake by roots controls water table movement and sediment oxidation in short Spartina marsh. Science 224:487–489.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Ferren, W. R., Jr., R. E. Good, R. Walker, and J. Arsenault. 1981. Vegetation and flora of Hog Island, a brackish wetland in the Mullica River, New Jersey. Bartonia 48:1–10.Google Scholar
  11. Frasco, B. A. and R. E. Good. 1982. Decomposition dynamics of Spartina alterniflora and Spartina patens in a New Jersey salt marsh. American Journal of Botany 69:402–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gallagher, J. L. 1978. Decomposition processes: summary and recommendations. p. 145–151. In R. E. Good, D. G. Whigham, and R. L. Simpson (eds.) Freshwater Wetlands: Ecological Processes and Management Potentials. Academic Press, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  13. Halupa, P. J. and B. L. Howes. 1995. Effects of tidally mediated litter moisture content on decomposition of Spartina alterniflora and S. patens. Marine Biology 124:379–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haslam, S. M. 1972. Biological flora of the British Isles no. 128: Phragmites communis Trin. Journal of Ecology 60:585–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hietz, P. 1992. Decomposition and nutrient dynamics of reed (Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin ex Steud.) litter in Lake Neusiedl, Austria. Aquatic Botany 43:211–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hobbie, S. 1992. Effects of plant species on nutrient cycling. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 7:213–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hooper, D. U. and P. M. Vitousek. 1998. Effects of plant composition and diversity on nutrient cycling. Ecological Monographs 68:121–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Howes, B. L., J. W. H. Dacey, and D. D. Goehringer. 1986. Factors controlling the growth form of Spartina alterniflora: feedbacks between aboveground production, sediment oxidation, nitrogen and salinity. Journal of Ecology 74:882–898.Google Scholar
  19. Howes, B. L., R. W. Howarth, J. M. Teal, and I. Valiela. 1981. Oxidation-reduction potentials in a saltmarsh: Spatial patterns and interactions with primary production. Limnology and Oceanography 26:350–360.Google Scholar
  20. Lee, S. Y. 1990. Net aerial primary productivity, litter production and decomposition of the reed Phragmites communis in a nature reserve in Hong Kong management implications. Marine Ecology Progress Series 66:161–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lissner, J. and H. H. Shierup 1997. Effect of salinity on the growth of Phragmites australis. Aquatic Botany 55:247–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Marinucci, A. C. and R. Bartha. 1982. A component model of microbial decomposition in a New Jersey salt marsh. Canadian Journal of Botany 50:1618–1624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mason, C. F. and R. J. Bryant. 1975. Production, nutrient content, and decomposition of Phragmites communis Trin. and Typha angustifolia L. Journal of Ecology 63:71–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Matsushita, N. and T. Matoh, 1991. Characterization of Na+ exclusion mechanisms of salt-tolerant reed plants in comparison with salt-sensitive rice plants. Physiologica Planta. 83:170–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Meyerson, L. A., R. M. Chambers, and K. A. Vogt. 2000. The effects of Phragmites removal on nutrient pool in a freshwater tidal marsh ecosystem. Biological Invasions, 1:129–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Miller, W. R. and F. E. Egler. 1950. Vegetation of the Wequetequock-Pawcatuck tidal marshes, Connecticut. Ecological Monographs. 20:143–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Miller, W. R. and F. E. Egler. 1950. Vegetation of the Wequetequock-Pawcatuck tidal marshes, Connecticut. Ecological Monographs. 20:143–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Orson, R. A. 2000. A paleoecological assessment of Phragmites australis in New England tidal marshes: changes in plant community structure during the last few millenia. Biological Invasions 1:149–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rooth, J. and C. Stevenson. 2000. Sediment deposition patterns in Phragmites australis communities: Implications for coastal areas threatened by rising sea-level. Wetlands Ecology and Management 8:173–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Teal, J. M. 1962. Energy flow in the salt marsh ecosystem of Georgia. Ecology. 43:614–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Valiela, I., B. Howes, R. Howarth, A. Giblin, K. Foreman, J. M. Teal, and J. E. Hobbie. 1980. Regulation of primary production and decomposition in a salt marsh ecosystem. p. 151–168. In Wetlands: Ecology and Management. Proceedings of the First International Wetlands Conference, New Delhi, India.Google Scholar
  32. Wainright, S. C., M. P. Weinstein, K. W. Able, and C. A. Currin 2000. Quantitative importance benthic microalgae, phytoplankton, and the detritus of smooth cordgrass (Spartina) and the common reed (Phragmites) to brackish marsh food webs. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 200:77–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. White, D. A. and J. M. Trapani. 1982. Factors influencing the disappearance of Spartina alterniflora from litterbags. Ecology 63: 242–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. White, D. A., T. E. Weiss, J. M. Trapani, and L. B. Thien. 1984. Productivity and decomposition of the dominant salt marsh plants in Louisiana. Ecology 59:751–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Windham, L. 1999. Effects of an invasive reedgrass, Phragmites australis, on nitrogen cycling in brackish tidal marshes of New York and New Jersey. Ph.D. Thesis. Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.Google Scholar
  36. Windham, L., and R. G. Lathrop, Jr. (1999). Effects of Phragmites australis on aboveground biomass and soil properties in brackish tidal marsh. Estuaries 22:927–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Wetland Scientists 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Natural ResourcesRutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUSA

Personalised recommendations