Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Carbon Storage by Carex stricta Tussocks: A Restorable Ecosystem Service?

  • Article
  • Published:
Wetlands Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Tussock-forming plants are globally widespread and enhance ecosystem services. We hypothesized that tussocks of Carex stricta store carbon (C) in addition to enhancing microtopography and biodiversity. We characterized tussock size, composition, and carbon pools associated with three undisturbed C. stricta-dominated tussock meadows in the Upper Midwest, USA. Remnant meadow tussocks were tall (17.2 cm), voluminous (4,113 cm3), and largely organic (95 %), indicating their ability to accumulate organic matter and store carbon. Tussocks were the second largest C pool (next to soil) in these ecosystems; they comprised 41–62 % of total biomass C. Using bomb 14C dating, we estimated that reference-site tussocks were over 50 years old. Their long-term persistence is consistent with lower leaf decomposition rates on tussocks (k = 0.26 years−1) than in tussock interspaces (k = 0.39 years−1). An urban tussock meadow had tussocks that were shorter than those of remnant sites, but less dense than a restored meadow. The restored meadow (≤15 years) had smaller, structurally distinct tussocks that stored less C. Among the five sites, C stocks were lowest in the urban and restored meadows, supporting the need to conserve existing C stores in remnant meadows and to restore tussock sedge for multiple ecosystem services.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aerts R (1996) Nutrient resorption from senescing leaves of perennials: are there general patterns? Journal of Ecology 84:597–608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aerts R, de Caluwe H (1997) Nutritional and plant-mediated controls on leaf litter decomposition of Carex species. Ecology 78:244–260

    Google Scholar 

  • Aerts R, Boot RGA, van der Aart PJM (1991) The relation between above-and belowground biomass allocation patterns and competitive ability. Oecologia 87:551–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armentano TV, Menges ES (1986) Patterns of change in the carbon balance of organic soil wetlands of the temperate zone. The Journal of Ecology 74:755–774

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson RB, Cairns JJ (2001) Plant decomposition and litter accumulation in depressional wetlands: functional performance of two wetland age classes that were created via excavation. Wetlands 21:354–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batjes NH (1996) Total carbon and nitrogen in the soils of the world. European Journal of Soil Science 47:151–163

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bernard JM, Fiala K (1986) Distribution and standing crop of living and dead roots in three wetland Carex species. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Society 113:1–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birdsey R (1992) Carbon storage and accumulation in the United States forest ecosystems. U.S.D.A., Forest Service, Washington. General Technical Report WO-59

  • Borin M, Salvato M (2012) Effects of five macrophytes on nitrogen remediation and mass balance in wetland mesocosms. Ecological Engineering 40:34–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bortoluzzi E, Epron D, Siegenthaler A, Gilbert D, Buttler A (2006) Carbon balance of a European mountain bog at contrasting stages of regeneration. New Phytologist 172:708–718

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bridgham SD, Megonigal JP, Keller JK, Bliss NB, Trettin C (2006) The carbon balance of North American wetlands. Wetlands 26:889–916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Budelsky RA, Galatowitsch SM (2004) Establishment of C. stricta seedlings in experimental wetlands with implications for restoration. Plant Ecology 175:91–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter MR (1993) Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapin FS, van Cleve K, Chapin MC (1979) Soil temperature and nutrient cycling in the tussock growth form of Eriophorum vaginatum. The Journal of Ecology 67:169–189

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen H, Harmon ME, Sexton J, Fasth B (2002) Fine-root decomposition and N dynamics in coniferous forests of the Pacific Northwest, U.S.A. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 32:320–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen N, Mitsch WJ, Jorgensen SE (1994) A first generation ecosystem model of the Des Plaines River experimental wetlands. Ecological Engineering 3:495–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane TS, Elliot K, Lipke CS (2006) Prairie plants of the University of Wisconisin-Madison Arboretum. UW Press, Madison

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole I, Lunt ID, Koen T (2005) Effects of sowing treatment and landscape position on establishment of the perennial tussock grass Themeda triandra (Poaceae) in degraded Eucalyptus woodlands in southeastern Australia. Restoration Ecology 13:552–561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costello DF (1936) Tussock meadows in southeastern Wisconsin. Botanical Gazette 97:610–648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crain CM, Bertness MD (2005) Community impacts of a tussock sedge: is ecosystem engineering important in benign habitats? Ecology 86:2695–2704

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damblon F (1992) Paleobotanical analyses of Eriophorum and Molinia tussocks as a means of reconstructing recent history of disturbed mires in the Haute-Ardenne, Belgium. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 75:273–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Deyn GB, Cornelissen JHC, Bardgett RD (2008) Plant functional traits and soil carbon sequestration in constrasting biomes. Ecology Letters 11:516–531

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elliot ET, Heil JW, Kelly EF, Monger HC (1999) Soil structural and other physical properties. In: Robertson GP, Coleman DC, Bledsoe CS, Sollins P (eds) Standard soil methods for long-term ecological research. Oxford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Eswaran H, Van den Berg E, Reich P, Kimble J (1995) Global soil carbon resources. In: Lal R, Kimble J, Levine E, Stewart BA (eds) Soils and global change. CRC Press Inc, Boca Raton, pp 27–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Fennessy MS, Brueske CC, Mitsch WJ (1994) Sediment deposition patterns in restored freshwater wetlands using sediment traps. Ecological Engineering 3:409–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fetcher N, Shaver GR (1982) Growth and tillering patterns within tussocks of Eriophorum vaginatum. Holarctic Ecology 5:180–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming KS, Kaminski RM, Tietjen TE, Schummer ML, Ervin GN, Nelms KD (2012) Vegetative forage quality and moist-soil management on Wetlands Reserve Program lands in Mississippi. Wetlands 32:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frieswyk CB, Johnston C, Zedler JB (2008) Identifying and characterizing dominant plants as an indicator of community condition. Journal of Great Lakes Research 33(Special Issue 3):125–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher SK (2009) Use of nitrogen and water treatments to manipulate Carex stricta Lam. propagules. M.S, University of Wisconsin-Madison

  • Gaudinski J, Trumbore S, Davidson E, Cook A, Markewitz D, Richter D (2001) The age of fine-root carbon in three forests of the eastern United States measured by radiocarbon. Oecologia 129:420–429

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbon A, Silman M, Malhi Y, Fisher J, Meir P, Zimmermann M, Dargie G, Farfan W, Garcia K (2010) Ecosystem carbon storage across the grassland–forest transition in the high Andes of Manu National Park. Peru Ecosystems 13:1097

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gleason RA, Laubhan MK, Euliss NH (2008) Ecosystem services derived from wetland conservation practices in the United States Prairie Pothole Region with an emphasis on the US Department of Agriculture Conservation Reserve and Wetlands Reserve Programs (No. 1745). US Geological Survey

  • Gorham E (1991) Northern peatlands: role in the carbon budget and probable responses to global warming. Ecological Applications 1:182–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hua Q, Barbetti M (2004) Review of tropospheric bomb 14C data for carbon cycle modeling and age calibration purposes. Radiocarbon 46:1273–1298

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Iannone BV, Galatowitsch SM (2008) Altering light and soil N to limit Phalaris arundinacea reinvastion in sedge meadow restorations. Resoration Ecology 16:689–701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: Synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K. and Reisinger, A. (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 pp

  • Johnson LC, Shaver GR, Giblin AE, Nadelhoffer KJ, Rastetter ER, Laundre JA, Murray GL (1996) Effects of drainage and temperature on carbon balance of tussock tundra micrososms. Oecologia 108:737–748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston CA, Zedler JB (2012) Identifying preferential associates to initiate restoration plantings. Restoration Ecology 20:764–772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston CA, Bedford BL, Bourdaghs M, Brown T, Frieswyk C, Tulbure M, Vaccaro L, Zedler JB (2007) Plant species indicators of physical environment in Great Lakes coastal wetlands. Journal of Great Lakes Research 33:106–124

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kivimaki SK, Yli-petays M, Tuittila E (2008) Carbon sink function of sedge and Sphagnum patches in a restored cut-away peatland: increased functional diversity leads to higher production. Journal of Applied Ecology 45:921–929

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koelbener A, Ström L, Edwards PJ, Olde Venterink H (2010) Plant species from mesotrophic wetlands cause relatively high methane emissions from peat soil. Plant and Soil 326:147–158

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kost M, DeSteven D (2000) Plant community responses to prescribed burning in Wisconsin sedge meadows. Natural Areas Journal 20:36–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Kucharik CJ, Brye KR, Norman JM, Foley JA, Gower ST, Bundy LG (2001) Measurements and modeling of carbon and nitrogen cycling in agroecosystems of southern Wisconsin: potential for SOC sequestration during the next 50 years. Ecosystems 4:237–258

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kull A, Kull A, Jaagus J, Kuusemets V, Mander Ü (2008) The effects of fluctuating climatic conditions and weather events on nutrient dynamics in a narrow mosaic riparian peatland. Boreal Environment Research 13:243–263

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence BA (2010) Carex stricta tussock formation, persistence, and the capacity to sequester carbon. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison

  • Lawrence BA, Zedler JB (2011) Formation of tussocks by sedges: effects of hydroperiod and nutrients. Ecological Applications 21:1745–1759

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence BA, Fahey TJ, Zedler JB (2013) Root dynamics of Carex stricta-dominated tussock meadows. Plant and Soil 364:325–339

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Levin I, Kromer B (2004) The tropospheric 14CO2 level in mid-latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere (1959–2003). Radiocarbon 46:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Lord LA (1996) Competition and dispersal in the regulation of plant species richness on Carex stricta tussocks. PhD thesis, University of New Hampshire

  • Mark AF, Fetcher N, Shaver GR, Chapin FS (1985) Estimated ages of mature tussocks of Eriophorum vaginatum along a latitudinal gradient in central Alaska, USA. Arctic and Alpine Research 17:1–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews E, Fung I (1987) Methane emission from natural wetlands: Global distribution, area, and environmental characteristics of sources. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 1:61–86

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mitra S, Wassmann R, Vlek PLG (2005) An appraisal of global wetland area and its organic carbon stock. Current Science 88:25–35

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nakamatte E, Lye KA (2007) AFLP-based differentiation in north Atlantic species of Carex sect. Phacocystis. Nordic Journal of Botany 25:318–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson JS (1963) Energy storage and the balance of producers and decomposers in ecological systems. Ecology 44:322–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peach M, Zedler JB (2006) How tussocks structure sedge meadow vegetation. Wetlands 26:322–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Post WM, Kwon KC (2000) Soil carbon sequestration and land-use change: processes and potential. Global Change Biology 6:317–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2011) A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing Vienna, Austria, http://www.R-project.org

    Google Scholar 

  • Raudsepp-Hearne C, Peterson GD, Bennett EM (2010) Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107:5242–5247

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Roth S, Seeger T, Poschlod P, Pfadenhauer J, Succow M (1999) Establishment of helophytes in the course of fen restoration. Applied Vegetation Science 2:131–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubino M, Dungait JAJ, Evershed RP, Bertolini T, De Angelis P, D’Onofrio A, Lagomarsino A, Lubritto C, Merola A, Terrasi F, Cotrufo MF (2010) Carbon input belowground is the major C flux contributing to leaf litter mass loss: evidences from a 13C labelled-leaf litter experiment. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 42:1009

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger WH (1997) Biogeochemisty: an analysis of global change. Academic, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaver G, Billings W (1975) Root production and root turnover in a wet tundra ecosystem, Barrow, Alaska. Ecology 56:401–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiles CA, Bemis B, Zedler JB (2008) Evaluating edaphic conditions favoring reed canary grass invasion in a restored native prairie. Ecological Restoration 26:61–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trumbore SE (1993) Comparison of carbon dynamics in tropical and temperate soils using radiocarbon measurements. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 7:275–290

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tuittila ES, Komulainen VM, Vasander H, Laine J (1999) Restored cut-away peatland as a sink for atmospheric CO2. Oecologia 120:563–574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USDA-NRCS (2008) The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov, 19 February 2008). National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, pp 70874–74490

    Google Scholar 

  • van de Koppel J, Crain CM (2006) Scale-dependent inhibition drives regular tussock spacing in a freshwater marsh. The American Naturalist 168:136–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitt DH, Halsey LA, Bauer IE, Campbell C (2000) Spatial and temporal trends in carbon storage of peatlands of continental western Canada through the Holocene. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 37:683–693

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walker S, Wilson JB, Lee WG (2003) Recovery of short tussock and woody species guilds in ungrazed Festuca novae-zelandiae short tussock grassland with fertiliser or irrigation. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 27:179–189

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallis E, Raulings E (2011) Relationship between water regime and hummock-building by Melaleuca ericifolia and Phragmites australis in a brackish wetland. Aquatic Botany 95:182–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werner KJ, Zedler JB (2002) How sedge meadow soils, microtopography, and vegetation respond to sedimentation. Wetlands 22:451–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zedler JB, Potter K (2008) Southern Wisconsin’s herbaceous wetlands: their recent history and precarious future. In: Waller D, Rooney T (eds) The vanishing present. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 193–210

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the UW-Madison Arboretum, Cherokee Marsh Conservation Park, Wisconsin DNR State Natural Areas, and Wetlands Research, Inc. for access to research sites. Research was supported in part by a NSF Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant (#0909933) and an ON and EK Allen Fellowship to BAL. We thank Julia Caldwell, Sally Gallagher, James Doherty, and Chun Ma for field and laboratory assistance. Timothy Fahey, Randy Jackson, and Chris Kucharik generously provided advice and access to their equipment; Kandis Elliot improved Figure 1.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Beth A. Lawrence

    Present address: Department of Environmental Science and Studies, DePaul University, 1110 West Belden Avenue, Chicago, IL, 60614, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Botany, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 430 Lincoln Drive, Madison, WI, 53706, USA

    Beth A. Lawrence & Joy B. Zedler

  2. Department of Arboretum, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 430 Lincoln Drive, Madison, WI, 53706, USA

    Joy B. Zedler

Authors
  1. Beth A. Lawrence
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joy B. Zedler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Beth A. Lawrence.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lawrence, B.A., Zedler, J.B. Carbon Storage by Carex stricta Tussocks: A Restorable Ecosystem Service?. Wetlands 33, 483–493 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-013-0405-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-013-0405-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation