6 resultados para Spartina alterniflora.
em Aquatic Commons
Resumo:
Four methods to control the smooth cordgrass Spartina (Spartina alterniflora) and the footwear worn by treatment personnelat several sites in Willapa Bay, Washington were evaluatedto determine the non-target impacts to eelgrass (Zostera japonica). Clone-sized infestations of Spartina were treated bymowing or a single hand-spray application of Rodeo® formulatedat 480 g L-1acid equivalence (ae) of the isopropylaminesalt of glyphosate (Monsanto Agricultural Co., St. Louis, MO;currently Dow AgroSciences, Indianapolis, IN) with the nonionic surfactant LI 700® (2% v/v) or a combination of mowing and hand spraying. An aerial application of Rodeo® with X-77 Spreader® (0.13% v/v) to a 2-ha meadow was also investigated. Monitoring consisted of measuring eelgrass shoot densities and percent cover pre-treatment and 1-yr post-treatment. Impacts to eelgrass adjacent to treated clones were determined 1 m from the clones and compared to a control 5-m away. Impacts from footwear were assessed at 5 equidistant intervals along a 10-m transect on mudflat and an untreated control transect at each of the three clone treatment sites. Impacts from the aerial application were determined by comparing shoot densities and percent cover 1, 3 and 10 m from the edge of the treated Spartina meadow to that at comparable distances from an untreated meadow. Methods utilized to control Spartina clones did not impact surrounding eelgrass at two of three sites. Decreases in shoot densities observed at the third site were consistent across treatments. Most impacts to eelgrass from the footwear worn by treatment personnel were negligible and those that were significant were limited to soft mud substrate. The aerial application of the herbicide was associated with reductions in eelgrass (shoot density and percent cover) at two of the three sampling distances, but reductions on the control plot were greater. We conclude that the unchecked spread of Spartina is a far greater threat to the survival and health of eelgrass than that from any of the control measures we studied. The basis for evaluating control measures for Spartina should be efficacy and logistical constraints and not impacts to eelgrass. PDF is 7 pages.
Persistence and Non-target Impact of Imazapyr Associated with Smooth Cordgrass Control in an Estuary
Resumo:
The herbicide (±-2-[4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)- 5-oxo-1 H -imidazol-2-yl]-3-pyridinecarboxylic acid (imazapyr) has shown potential to control smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora Loisel), a noxious weed in many estuaries throughout the world. Research was conducted under tidal estuary conditions in Willapa Bay, Washington, to determine imazapyr’s persistence and aquatic risk and impact to non-target estuary species. Persistence of imazapyr in water and sediment followed an exponential decay.(PDF has 6 pages.)
Resumo:
We evaluated four methods to control smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora Loisel), hereafter spartina, in Willapa Bay, Washington: mowing, mowing plus herbicide combination, herbicide only for clones, and aerial application of herbicide for meadows. (PDF has 7 pages.)
Resumo:
Terns and skimmers nesting on saltmarsh islands often suffer large nest losses due to tidal and storm flooding. Nests located near the center of an island and on wrack (mats of dead vegetation, mostly eelgrass Zostera) are less susceptible to flooding than those near the edge of an island and those on bare soil or in saltmarsh cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora). In the 1980’s Burger and Gochfeld constructed artificial eelgrass mats on saltmarsh islands in Ocean County, New Jersey. These mats were used as nesting substrate by common terns (Sterna hirundo) and black skimmers (Rynchops niger). Every year since 2002 I have transported eelgrass to one of their original sites to make artificial mats. This site, Pettit Island, typically supports between 125 and 200 pairs of common terns. There has often been very little natural wrack present on the island at the start of the breeding season, and in most years natural wrack has been most common along the edges of the island. The terns readily used the artificial mats for nesting substrate. Because I placed artificial mats in the center of the island, the terns have often avoided the large nest losses incurred by terns nesting in peripheral locations. However, during particularly severe flooding events even centrally located nests on mats are vulnerable. Construction of eelgrass mats represents an easy habitat manipulation that can improve the nesting success of marsh-nesting seabirds.
Resumo:
Extensive losses of coastal wetlands in the United States caused by sea-level rise, land subsidence, erosion, and coastal development have increased hterest in the creation of salt marshes within estuaries. Smooth cordgrass Spartina altemiflora is the species utilized most for salt marsh creation and restoration throughout the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the U.S., while S. foliosa and Salicomia virginica are often used in California. Salt marshes have many valuable functions such as protecting shorelines from erosion, stabilizing deposits of dredged material, dampening flood effects, trapping water-born sediments, serving as nutrient reservoirs, acting as tertiary water treatment systems to rid coastal waters of contaminants, serving as nurseries for many juvenile fish and shellfish species, and serving as habitat for various wildlife species (Kusler and Kentula 1989). The establishment of vegetation in itself is generally sufficient to provide the functions of erosion control, substrate stabilization, and sediment trapping. The development of other salt marsh functions, however, is more difficult to assess. For example, natural estuarine salt marshes support a wide variety of fish and shellfish, and the abundance of coastal marshes has been correlated with fisheries landings (Turner 1977, Boesch and Turner 1984). Marshes function for aquatic species by providing breeding areas, refuges from predation, and rich feeding grounds (Zimmerman and Minello 1984, Boesch and Turner 1984, Kneib 1984, 1987, Minello and Zimmerman 1991). However, the relative value of created marshes versus that of natural marshes for estuarine animals has been questioned (Carnmen 1976, Race and Christie 1982, Broome 1989, Pacific Estuarine Research Laboratory 1990, LaSalle et al. 1991, Minello and Zimmerman 1992, Zedler 1993). Restoration of all salt marsh functions is necessary to prevent habitat creation and restoration activities from having a negative impact on coastal ecosystems.