Short-term effects on macroinvertebrates and fishes of herbiciding and mowing Phragmites australis-dominated tidal marsh

Northeastern Naturalist

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 191-212

  Fell, Paul E ^a   Warren, R Scott ^a   Curtis, Annie E ^a   Steiner, Erin M ^a  

^a The Holleran Center for Community Action and Public Policy   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; CRUSTACEA; FUNDULUS HETEROCLITUS; PHRAGMITES; PHRAGMITES AUSTRALIS; PISCES; TYPHA; TYPHA ANGUSTIFOLIA;

EID: 33746347701     PISSN: 10926194     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1656/1092-6194(2006)13[191:SEOMAF]2.0.CO;2     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Able, K.W., and S.M. Hagan. 2000. Effects of Phragmites australis invasion on marsh surface macrofauna: Response of fishes and decapod crustaceans. Estuaries 23:633-646.
2. Able, K.W., and S.M. Hagan. 2003. Impact of common reed, Phragmites australis, on essential fish habitat: Influence on reproduction, embryological development, and larval abundance of mummichog (Fundulus heteroclitus). Estuaries 26:40-50.
3. Able, K.W., S.M. Hagan, and S.A. Brown. 2003. Mechanisms of marsh habitat alteration due to Phragmites: Response of young-of-the-year mummichog (Fundulus heteroclitus) to treatment for Phragmites removal. Estuaries 26:484-494.
4. Angradi, T.R., S.M. Hagan, and K.W. Able. 2001. Vegetation type and the intertidal macroinvertebrate fauna of a brackish marsh: Phragmites vs. Spartina. Wetlands 21:75-92.
5. Benoit, L.K., and R.A. Askins. 1999. Impact of the spread of Phragmites on the distribution of birds in Connecticut tidal marshes. Wetlands 19:194-208.
6. Benoit, L.K., and R.A. Askins. 2002. Relationship between habitat area and the distribution of tidal marsh birds. Wilson Bulletin 114:314-323.
7. Bertness, M.D., P.J. Ewanchuk, and B.R. Silliman. 2002. Anthropogenic modification of New England salt marsh landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99:1395-1398.
8. Bestika, M.R.A. 1996. An ecological and historical study of Phragmites australis along the Atlantic coast. M.Sc. Thesis. Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA.
9. Carr, M.R. 1997. PRIMER User Manual: Plymouth Routines in Multivariate Ecological Research. Plymouth Marine Laboratories, Plymouth, UK.
10. Chambers, R.M., L.A. Myerson, and K. Saltonstall. 1999. Expansion of Phragmites australis into tidal wetlands of North America. Aquatic Botany 64:261-274.
11. Fell, P.E., S.P. Weissback, D.A. Jones, M.A. Fallon, J.A. Zeppieri, E.K. Faison, K.A. Lennon, K.J. Newberry, and L.K. Reddington. 1998. Does invasion of oligohaline tidal marshes by reed grass, Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steud., affect the availability of prey resources for the mummichog, Fundulus heteroclitus L.? Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 222:59-77.
12. Fell, P.E., R.S. Warren, J.K. Light, R.L. Rawson, Jr., and S.M. Fairley. 2003. Comparison of fish and macroinvertebrate use of Typha angustifolia, Phragmites australis, and treated Phragmites marshes along the lower Connecticut River. Estuaries 26:534-551.
13. Geller, M.S. 1972. Phragmites: Life preserver of the salt marsh. Aquatic Reporter and Underwater Naturalist 7:4-11.
14. Guntenspergen, G.R., J.R. Keough, and M.P. Weinstein. 2002. Phragmites technical forum and workshop: Synthesis of scientific knowledge and management needs. Pp. 1-8, In Proceedings from the Technical Forum and Workshop, Phragmites australis: A Sheep in Wolf's Clothing? New Jersey Sea Grant, Fort Hancock, NJ. Publication #NJSG-03-516.
15. Hanson, S.R., D.T. Osgood, and D.J. Yozzo. 2002. Nekton use of a Phragmites australis marsh in the Hudson River, New York, USA. Wetlands 22:326-337.
16. Hyslop, E.J. 1980. Stomach contents analysis: A review of methods and application. Journal of Fish Biology 17:411-429.
17. James-Perri, M.J., K.B. Raposa, and J.G. Catena. 2001. Diet composition of mummichogs, Fundulus heteroclitus, from restoring and unrestricted regions of a New England (USA) salt marsh. Esturine, Coastal, and Shelf Science 53:205-213.
18. Kneib, R.T. 1994. Spatial pattern, spatial scale, and feeding in fishes. Pp. 171-185, In D.J. Stouder, K.L. Fresh, and R.J. Feller (Eds.). Theory and Application in Fish Feeding Ecology. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC.
19. Kneib, R.T. 1997. The role of tidal marshes in the ecology of estuarine nekton. Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Review 35:163-220.
20. Kneib, R.T. 2000. Salt marsh ecoscapes and production transfers by estuarine nekton in the southeastern United States. Pp. 267-291, In M.P. Weinstein and M.P. Kreeger (Eds.). Concepts and Controversies in Tidal Marsh Ecology. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA.
21. Lopez, G.R., J.S. Levinton, and L.B. Slobodkin. 1977. The effect of grazing by the detritivore Orchestia grillus on Spartina litter and its associated microbial community. Oecologia 30:111-127.
22. Marks, M., B. Lapin, and J. Randall. 1994. Phragmites australis (P. communis): Threats, management, and monitoring. Natural Areas Journal 14:285-294.
23. Meyer, D.L., J.M. Johnson, and J.W. Gill. 2001. Comparison of nekton use of Phragmites australis and Spartina alterniflora marshes in the Chesapeake Bay, USA. Marine Ecology Progress Series 209:71-84.
24. Meyerson, L.A., K. Saltonstall, L. Windham, E. Kiviat, and S. Findlay. 2000. A comparison of Phragmites australis in freshwater and brackish marsh environments in North America. Wetlands Ecology and Management 8:89-103.
25. Minchinton, T.E., and M.D. Bertness. 2003. Disturbance-mediated competition and the spread of Phragmites australis in a coastal marsh. Ecological Applications 13:1400-1416.
26. Nichols, G.E. 1920. The vegetation of Connecticut VI. The plant association of depositing areas along the seacoast. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 47:511-548.
27. Osgood, D.T., D.J. Yozzo, R.M. Chambers, D. Jacobson, T. Hoffman, and J. Wnek. 2003. Tidal hydrology and habitat utilization by resident nekton in Phragmites and non-Phragmites marshes. Estuaries 26:522-533.
28. Parsons, K.C. 2003. Reproductive success of wading birds using Phragmites marsh and upland nesting habitats. Estuaries 26:596-601.
29. Posey, M.H., T.D. Alphin, D.L. Meyer, and J.M. Johnson. 2003. Benthic communities of common reed Phragmites australis and marsh cordgrass Spartina alterniflora marshes in Chesapeake Bay. Marine Ecology Progress Series 261:51-61.
30. Raichel, D.L., K.W. Able, and J.M. Hartman. 2003. The influence of Phragmites (common reed) on the distribution, abundance, and potential prey of a resident marsh fish in the Hackensack Meadowlands, New Jersey. Estuaries 26:511-521.
31. Rice, D., J. Rooth, and J.C. Stevenson. 2000. Colonization and expansion of Phragmites australis in upper Chesapeake Bay tidal marshes. Wetlands 20:280-299.
32. Rietsma, C.S., I. Valiela, and R.S. Buchsbaum. 1988. Detrital chemistry, growth, and food choice in the salt-marsh snail (Melampus bidentatus). Ecology 69:261-266.
33. Roman, C.T., W.A. Niering, and R.S. Warren. 1984. Salt marsh vegetation change in response to tidal restriction. Environmental Management 8:141-150.
34. Saltonstall, K. 2002. Cryptic invasion by a non-native genotype of the common reed, Phragmites australis into North America. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99:2445-2449.
35. Scatolini, S.R., and J.B. Zedler. 1996. Epibenthic invertebrates of natural and constructed marshes of San Diego Bay. Wetlands 16:24-37.
36. Talley, T.S., and L.A. Levin. 2001. Modification of sediments and macrofauna by an invasive marsh plant. Biological Invasions 3:51-68.
37. Thompson, L.S. 1984. Comparison of the diets of the tidal marsh snail, Melampus bidentatus, and the amphipod Orchestia grillus. Nautilus 98:44-53.
38. Turner, R.E., and R.S. Warren. 2003. Valuation of continuous and intermittent Phragmites control. Estuaries 26:618-623.
39. Warren, R.S., P.E. Fell, J.L. Grimsby, E.L. Buck, G.G. Rilling, and R.A. Fertik. 2001. Rates, patterns, and impacts of Phragmites australis expansion and effects of experimental Phragmites control on vegetation, macroinvertebrates, and fish within tidelands of the lower Connecticut River. Estuaries 24:90-107.
40. Warren, R.S., P.E. Fell, R. Rozsa, A.H. Brawley, A.C. Orsted, E.T. Olson, V. Swamy, and W.A. Niering. 2002. Salt marsh restoration in Connecticut: 20 years of science and management. Restoration Ecology 10:497-513.
41. Weinstein, M.P., and J.H. Balletto. 1999. Does the common reed, Phragmites australis, affect essential fish habitat? Estuaries 22:793-802.
42. Windham, L., and R.G. Lathrop, Jr. 1999. Effects of Phragmites australis (common reed) invasion on aboveground biomass and soil properties in brackish tidal marsh of the Mullica River, New Jersey. Estuaries 22:927-935.