Seasonal wetlands on the Lake Wales Ridge, Florida: does a relict seed bank persist despite long term disturbance?
- 357 Downloads
Wetlands maintain biodiversity and provide numerous ecosystem services, so the pressure to perform successful restoration consequently is high. However, restoration projects rarely include an in-depth assessment of wetland potential for recovery, and restoration techniques may not be tailored to site-specific concerns. This study examined the seed bank of disturbed wetlands slotted for hydrologic, but not vegetation, restoration to determine if a seed bank comparable to that of nearby undisturbed wetlands persisted despite long-term anthropogenic disturbance. We compared the aboveground vegetation and seed bank compositions under drained, drawdown, and flooded conditions between undisturbed and historically ditched (“disturbed”) wetlands. Disturbed and undisturbed wetlands shared fewer than 30 % of total aboveground species. While undisturbed wetlands were dominated by graminoids, disturbed wetlands had greater cover of forbs. The seed banks of disturbed wetlands had high species diversity, but their composition was dissimilar to that of nearby undisturbed wetlands. In total, the seed banks of both disturbance histories germinated 56 species; drained conditions had the fewest germinants while flooded conditions had the most. Germinant richness was significantly affected by disturbance, moisture, and their interaction; evenness was significantly affected by moisture, and Shannon diversity by disturbance. Because the seed bank of disturbed wetlands included many fast-growing wetland plants, passive vegetation restoration and active hydrologic restoration may result in wetlands overgrown with weedy species and with fewer conservative wetland plants. An understanding of the capacity for seed banks to re-vegetate wetlands post-restoration and approximate undisturbed wetlands is crucial to the overall success of restoration projects.
KeywordsSeed bank Indicator species analysis Florida Panicum abscissum
We would like to thank Archbold Biological Station for opportunity and funds to conduct this research. We would especially like to acknowledge Carl Weekley and the other members of Archbold Biological Station’s Plant Ecology Program, who provided countless days of scientific support throughout this study. Additionally, we would like to thank Carl Weekley, Richard Marinos, Betsie Rothermel, and an anonymous reviewer for reviewing this manuscript.
- Abrahamson WG, Johnson AF, Layne JN, Peroni PA (1984) Vegetation of Archbold Station, Florida: an example of the southern Lake Wales Ridge. Florida Sci 47:209–250Google Scholar
- Baskin CC, Baskin JM (2001) Seeds: ecology, biogeography, and evolution of dormancy and germination. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
- Boughton EH, Quintana-Ascencio PF, Bohlen PJ, Jenkins DG, Pickert R (2010) Land-use and isolation interact to affect wetland plant assemblages. Ecography 33:461–470Google Scholar
- Christman SP, Judd WS (1990) Notes on plants endemic to Florida scrub. Florida Sci 53:52–73Google Scholar
- FNAI Florida Natural Areas Inventory (2010) Guide to the natural communities of Florida: 2010 edition. Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI), TallahasseeGoogle Scholar
- King DM, Bohlen CC (1994) Making sense of wetland restoration costs. University of Maryland Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, p 12Google Scholar
- Landman GB, Menges ES (1999) Dynamics of woody bayhead invasion into seasonal ponds in South Central Florida. Castanea 64:130–137Google Scholar
- Lohrer FE (2007) Archbold biological station fact sheet. http://www.archbold-station.org/station/html/aboutus/factsht.html. Accessed 20 June 2012
- McCorry MJ, Renou F (2003) Ecology and management of Juncus effusus (soft rush) on cutaway ponds, Forest Ecosystem Research Group, Department of Environmental Resource ManagementGoogle Scholar
- Navarra JJ, Quintana-Ascencio PF (2012) Spatial pattern and composition of the Florida scrub seed bank and vegetation along an anthropogenic disturbance gradient. Appl Veg SciGoogle Scholar
- Swain H, Rothermel B (2012) Excerpts from draft of reserve managementGoogle Scholar
- Team RDC (2011) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
- USDA, United States Department of Agriculture (2012) FY 2011 acres enrolled and contracts data. Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- van der Valk AG, Verhoeven JTA (1988) Potential role of seed banks and understory species in restoring quaking fens from floating forests. Vegetatio 73:3–13Google Scholar
- Weekley CW, Lindon HH, Menges ES (2006) Archbold biological station plant list. http://www.archbold-station.org/station/html/datapub/species/lists/plantsintro.html. Accessed 20 June 2012
- Wunderlin RP, Hansen BF (2003) Guide to the vascular plants of Florida, 2nd edn. University Press of Florida, GainsvilleGoogle Scholar
- Wunderlin RP, Hansen BF (2008) Atlas of Florida vascular plants, Institute for Systematic Botany University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USAGoogle Scholar