Hydrobiologia

, Volume 656, Issue 1, pp 173–186

Relationships between the biomass production of invasive Ludwigia species and physical properties of habitats in France

AQUATIC WEEDS

Abstract

Ludwigia grandiflora ssp. hexapetala and L. peploides ssp. montevidensis have invaded many types of fresh water ecosystem in France leading to serious problems of management of these macrophytes. The prediction of extracted plant biomass quantities for every control method could considerably help in plant removal and selecting management choices. The paper presents results of the research program “Biological Invasions” granted by the French Environmental Agency concerning the Ludwigia species (2003–2006): “Characterization of the relations between biotopes, plant populations and human activities: Implications for management”. The objective of this work is: (1) to compare environmental variables in the western part of France where colonised water bodies are widespread, (2) to link these parameters with the evaluation of standing crops and (3) to propose implications for management planning and control methods. Measured dry biomass of Ludwigia spp. varied from 200 g DM m−2 in shallow lakes to 4,500 g DM m−2 in a meander of a eutrophicated river. Results depend on the scale of the analysis: within sites, between-sites, at different seasons or years. In sunny conditions, optimal for these plants and in nutrient rich areas, biomass is high. In general, exposure to wind, waves and currents reduces the standing crop. For plant production as well as removal work, the status of plant development and water level, are key factors.

Keywords

Ludwigia spp. Water bodies Biomass Management Invasive species 

References

  1. Alpert, P., E. Bone & C. Holzapfel, 2000. Invasiveness, invasibility and the role of environmental stress in the spread of non-native plants. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 3/1: 52–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ancrenaz, K. & A. Dutartre, 2002. Cartographie des Jussies (Ludwigia spp) en France métropolitaine. Cemagref, Unité de Recherche Qualité des Eaux, étude n° 73, Département Gestion des Milieux Aquatiques, Ed. CEMAGREF: 18.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, G. L., E. S. Delfosse, N. R. Spencer, C. W. Prosser & R. D. Richard, 2003. Lessons in developing successful invasive weed control programs. Journal of Range Management 56(1): 2–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andreu, J. & M. Vilà, 2009. Risk analysis of potential invasive plants in Spain. Journal for Nature Conservation 18: 34–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baattrup-Pedersen, A. T. R., 2004. Impacts of different weed cutting practices on macrophyte species diversity and composition in a Danish stream. River Research and Applications 20: 103–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berner, L., 1956. Observations sur Jussieua repens L. (= J.grandiflora Michx.). Archiv für Hydrobiologie 52(1–2): 287–291.Google Scholar
  7. Berner, L., 1971. Note sur Jussieua en France. Bulletin du Centre d’Etude et de Recherche scientifique de Biarritz 8(4): 675–692.Google Scholar
  8. Branquart, E., E. Baus, N. Pieret, S. Vanderhoeven & P. Desmet, 2006. SOS Invasions ! Les espèces exotiques invasives en Belgique. Abstract book Bruxelles, 9–10 mars: 76.Google Scholar
  9. Brock, J. H., M. Wade, P. Pysek & D. Green (eds), 1997. Plant invasions: studies from North America and Europe. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden: 223.Google Scholar
  10. Callaway, R. M. & J. L. Maron, 2006. What have exotic plant invasions taught us over the past 20 years? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 21(7): 369–374.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Coudreuse, J., J. Haury & M. Bozec, 2009. Gestion des complexes d’invasives sur une gravière de Rennes. AFPP – 2ème conférence sur l’entretien des espaces verts, jardins, gazons, forêts, zones aquatiques et autres zones non agricoles. - Angers – 28 et 29 octobre 2009: 304–314. CDRom. ISBN: 2-905550-19-8.Google Scholar
  12. Crossman, N. D., B. A. Bryan & D. A. Cooke, 2008. An invasive plant and climate change threat index for weed risk management: integrating habitat distribution pattern and dispersal process. Ecological Indicators 440: 16.Google Scholar
  13. Daehler, C. C., 1998. The taxonomic distribution of invasive angiosperm plants: ecological insights and comparison to agricultural weeds. Biological Conservation 84(2): 167–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DAISIE, 2009. Handbook of Alien Species in Europe Series: Invading Nature. Springer Series in Invasion Ecology 3 (XXVIII). Springer, Dordrecht: 400.Google Scholar
  15. Dandelot, S., 2004. Les Ludwigia spp. invasives du sud de la France: historique, biosystématique, biologie et écologie. Thèse de doctorat de l’Université de Aix-Marseille: 207.Google Scholar
  16. Dandelot, S., R. Verlaque, A. Dutartre & A. Cazaubon, 2005a. Ecological, dynamic and taxonomic problems due to Ludwigia (Onagraceae) in France. Hydrobiologia 551: 131–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dandelot, S., R. Matheron, J. Le Petit, R. Verlaque & A. Cazaubon, 2005b. Variations temporelles des paramètres physicochimiques et microbiologiques de trois écosystèmes aquatiques (Sud-Est de la France) envahis par des Ludwigia. C.R. Biologies 328: 991–999.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Doren, R. F., J. C. Volin & J. H. Richards, 2009. Invasive exotic plant indicators for ecosystem restoration: an example from the Everglades restoration program. Ecological Indicators 9S(6): S29–S36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dutartre, A., 2002. Panorama des modes de gestion des plantes aquatiques: nuisances, usages, techniques et risques induits. Ingénieries 30: 29–42.Google Scholar
  20. Dutartre, A., 2004. De la régulation des plantes aquatiques envahissantes à la gestion des hydrosystèmes. Ingénieries – E. A. T., n° spécial Ingénierie écologique: 87–100.Google Scholar
  21. Dutartre, A. & K. Ancrenaz, 2003. Réponse des jussies (Ludwigia sp.) aux réponses thermiques. Projet AQUABIO, Action 4, Opération A. Programme Gestion et Impacts du changement climatique, Cemagref Bordeaux: 21.Google Scholar
  22. Dutartre, A., J. Haury & A. Jigorel, 1999. Succession of Egeria densa in a drinking water reservoir in Morbihan (France). Hydrobiologia 415: 243–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dutartre, A., C. Charbonnier, V. Dosda, A. Fare, C. Lebougre, I. Saint Macary & O. Touzot, 2002. Production primaire des jussies (Ludwigia spp.) dans le Sud Ouest de la France. Actes du 11ème symposium international EWRS sur la gestion des plantes aquatiques, Moliets et Maâ(France), 2–6 septembre 2002: 23–26.Google Scholar
  24. Dutartre A., J. Haury, S. Dandelot, J. Coudreuse, B. Ruaux, E. Lambert, P. Le Goffe & M. J. Menozzi, 2007. Les jussies: caractérisation des relations entre sites, populations et activités humaines. Implications pour la gestion. Programme de recherche INVABIO, rapport final: 128.Google Scholar
  25. Dutartre, A., M. C. Peltre, N. Pipet, L. Fournier & M. J. Menozzi, 2008. Régulations des développements de plantes aquatiques. Ingénieries – E. A. T, N° spécial “Plantes aquatiques d’eau douce”: 135–154.Google Scholar
  26. Gassmann, A., M. J. W. Cock, R. Shaw & H. C. Evans, 2006. The potential for biological control of invasive alien aquatic weeds in Europe: a review. Hydrobiologia 570: 217–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gerber, E., C. Krebs, C. Murrel, M. Moretti, R. Rocklin & U. Schaffner, 2008. Exotic invasive knotweeds (Fallopia spp.) negatively affect native plant and invertebrate assemblages in European riparian habitats. Biological Conservation 141: 646–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Greenway, M. & A. Woolley, 1999. Constructed wetlands in Queensland: performance efficiency and nutrient bioaccumulation. Ecological Engineering 12(1–2): 39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Grillas, P., L. Tan Ham, A. Dutartre & F. Mesléard, 1992. Distribution de Ludwigia en France. Etude des causes de l’expansion récente en Camargue. 15ème conférence du COLUMA. 1991. Versailles. Ann. Association Nationale de Protection des Plantes 3: 1083–1090.Google Scholar
  30. Haury, J., J. Coudreuse, J. Debril, B. Ruaux & A. Jigorel, 2008a. The role of invasive macrophytes in Nitrogen and Phosphorus dynamics in two gravel pits, Rennes – France. Proceedings of the 30th Congress of International Association of Theoretical and Applied Limnology, Montréal 12–18 August 2007, 30(4): 607–610.Google Scholar
  31. Haury, J., H. Rakotondrasoa, J. Coudreuse, B. Ruaux, M. Le Tréis, D. Rolland & N. Briant, 2008b. Les complexes d’espèces introduites: examen comparé des biomasses en place et des stratégies d’occupation de l’espace. Conséquences pour la gestion de la basse vallée du Don (44). In Bonis A. (ed.) Actualité de la recherche en écologie des communautés végétales – Actes du quatrième colloque ECOVEG Rennes, 12–14 mars 2008 Coll. TEC&DOC Lavoisier, Paris: 191–198.Google Scholar
  32. Holverda, W. J., R. van Moorsel & H. Duistermaat, 2009. New records of rare plants in 2005, 2006 and partly 2007. Gorteria 34(1–2): 1–40.Google Scholar
  33. Howard, R. J. & C. J. Wells, 2009. Plant community establishment following drawdown of a reservoir in southern Arkansas, USA. Wetlands Ecology and Management 17(6): 565–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hulme, P. E., 2006. Beyond control: wider implications for management of biological invasions. Journal of Applied Ecology 43: 835–847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hussner, A., 2009. Growth and photosynthesis of four invasive aquatic plant species in Europe. Weed Research 49(5): 506–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jones, C. G., J. H. Lawton & M. Shachak, 1997. Positive and negative effects of organisms as physical ecosystem engineers. Ecology 78(7): 1946–1957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Knowler, D. & E. Barbier, 2005. Importing exotic plants and the risk of invasion: are market-based instruments adequate? Ecological Economics 52: 341–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lacoul, P. & B. Freedman, 2006. Environmental influences on aquatic plants in freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Reviews 14(2): 89–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lacroix, P., J. Le Bail, J. Geslin & G. Hunault, 2008. Liste des plantes vasculaires invasives, potentiellement invasives et à surveiller en région Pays de la Loire. Ed. Conservatoire National Botanique de Brest, Antenne régionale des Pays-de-Loire: 55.Google Scholar
  40. Lambert, E., 2009: Plantes exotiques envahissantes: Synthèse bibliographique. CEREA/UCO/Angers Comité des Pays de la Loire/Gestion des plantes exotiques envahissantes; GIS « Macrophytes des Eaux continentales » : Ed. DREAL Pays-de-la-Loire: 106.Google Scholar
  41. Lambert, E., J. Coudreuse, A. Dutartre & J. Haury, 2009a. Gestion des jussies en France : implications des relations entre les caractéristiques des biotopes et la production de biomasse. AFPP – 2ème Conférence sur l’entretien des espaces verts, jardins, gazons, forêts, zones aquatiques et autres zones non agricoles; Angers – 28 et 29 octobre 2009: 253–265. CDRom. ISBN: 2-905550-19-8.Google Scholar
  42. Lambert, E., A. Génillon, A. Dutartre & J. Haury, 2009b. Gestion des jussies en cours d’eau : modalités et coûts des travaux. AFPP – 2ème Conférence sur l’entretien des espaces verts, jardins, gazons, forêts, zones aquatiques et autres zones non agricoles; Angers – 28 et 29 octobre 2009: 266–278. CDRom. ISBN: 2-905550-19-8.Google Scholar
  43. Legrand C., 2002. Pour contrôler la prolifération des Jussies (Ludwigia spp.) dans les zones humides méditerranéennes. Guide technique, Agence Méditerranéenne de l’Environnement: 68.Google Scholar
  44. Magnanon, S., J. Haury, L. Diard & F. Pelloté, 2007. Liste des plantes introduites envahissantes (plantes invasives) de Bretagne. Ed. Conseil Scientifique Régional du Patrimoine Naturel de Bretagne: 24.Google Scholar
  45. Matrat, R., L. Anras, L. Vienne, F. Hervochon, C. Pineau, S. Bastian, A. Dutartre, J. Haury, E. Lambert, H. Gilet, P. Lacroix & L. Maman, 2006 (2004 1ère éd.). Gestion des plantes exotiques envahissantes – Guide technique. (Comité des Pays de la Loire de gestion des plantes exotiques envahissantes, Agence de l’Eau Loire-Bretagne, Forum des Marais atlantiques, DIREN Pays de la Loire &: Conservatoire régional des rives de la Loire et de ses affluents) - 2ème édition, 2006; revue et augmentée: 86 [available on internet at http://www.pays-de-la-loire.developpementdurable.gouv.fr/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=583] cited 2010 September 3.
  46. Muller, S. (coord), 2004. Plantes invasives en France. Coll. Patrimoines Naturels. Publications scientifiques du Muséum, Paris: 168.Google Scholar
  47. Okada, M., B. J. Grewell & M. Jasieniuk, 2009. Clonal spread of invasive Ludwigia hexapetala and L. grandiflora in freshwater wetlands of California. Aquatic Botany 91: 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Randall, J. M., L. E. Morse, N. Benton, R. Hiebert, S. Lu & T. Killeffer, 2008. The invasive species assessment protocol: a tool for creating regional and national lists of invasive nonnative plants that negatively impact biodiversity. Invasive Plant Science and Management 1(1): 36–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Reddy, K. R., J. C. Tucker & B. M. Debusk, 1987. The role of Egeria densa in removing nitrogen and phosphorus from nutrient enriched waters. Journal of Aquatic Plant Management 25: 14–19.Google Scholar
  50. Reida, A. M., L. Morina, P. O. Downeyb, K. Frenchc & J. G. Virtued, 2009. Does invasive plant management aid the restoration of natural ecosystems? Biological Conservation 142(10): 2342–2349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rejmankova, E., 1992. Ecology of creeping macrophytes with special reference to Ludwigia peploides (H. B. K.) Raven. Aquatic Botany 43: 283–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Richards, C. L., O. Bossdorf, N. Z. Muth, J. Gurevitch & M. Pigliucci, 2006. Jack of all trades, master of some? On the role of phenotypic plasticity in plant invasions. Ecology Letters 9: 981–993.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Richardson, D. M., P. Pysek, M. Rejmank, M. G. Barbour, D. Panetta & C. J. West, 2000. Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: concepts and definitions. Diversity and Distributions 6: 93–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ruaux, B., 2008. Les plantes envahissantes des corridors fluviaux: traits biologiques, impacts de Ludwigia peploides et L. grandiflora en Loire moyenne et implications pour la gestion. Université François Rabelais, Tours, thèse de doctorat: 279.Google Scholar
  55. Ruaux, B., S. Greulich, J. Haury & J.-P. Berton, 2008. Sexual reproduction of two alien invasive Ludwigia (Onagraceae) on the middle Loire River, France. Aquatic Botany 90: 143–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Thiébaut, G., T. Rolland, F. Robach, M. Trémolières & S. Muller, 1997. Quelques conséquences de l’introduction de deux espèces de macrophytes, Elodea canadensis Michaux et Elodea nuttallii St. John, dans les écosystèmes aquatiques continentaux: exemple de la plaine d’Alsace et des Vosges du nord (nord-est de la France). Bulletin Français de la Pêche et de la Pisciculture 344(345): 441–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Willby, N. J., 2007. Managing invasive aquatic plants: problems and prospects. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 17(7): 659–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Yen, S. & P. Myerscough, 1989. Co-existence of three species of amphibious plants in relation to spatial and temporal variation: investigation of plant responses. Australian Journal of Ecology 14(3): 305–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Lambert
    • 1
  • A. Dutartre
    • 3
  • J. Coudreuse
    • 2
  • J. Haury
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre d’Etude et de Recherche sur les Ecosystèmes Aquatiques (CEREA/IBEA – IRFA)Angers Cedex 01France
  2. 2.UMR INRA-AGROCAMPUS OUEST Ecologie et Santé des EcosystèmesRennes CedexFrance
  3. 3.Cemagref, UR REBXCestas CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations