Journal of Coastal Conservation

, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp 463–472 | Cite as

Accommodation space limits plant invasion: Ammophila arenaria survival on New Zealand beaches

  • Teresa M. Konlechner
  • Michael J. Hilton
  • David A. Orlovich
Article

Abstract

Purpose

Ammophila arenaria (marram grass) may invade remote beach-dune systems by the marine dispersal of rhizomes. In New Zealand, and elsewhere, the conservation of the remaining dune systems of high conservation value would be advanced by predicting where this species might successfully establish and undertaking appropriate surveillance. This paper examines the ability of A. arenaria to sustain growth in the stressful back-beach environment.

Methods

Shoots developed from rhizomes were subjected to burial, depth, salt spray and desiccation treatments in the glasshouse. Plants were also subjected to salt water inundation. Two field populations of A. arenaria were surveyed for a period of almost 3 years, following rhizome stranding in July 2007.

Results

Shoots were able to emerge from depths of up to 40 cm. Rhizomes failed to produce shoots when the moisture content of rhizomes was less than 18.25 %, which occurred after 3 days of drought. The survival of buried plants was significantly reduced compared to non-buried plants when burial exceeded 80 % of the plant height. No plants survived when burial exceeded 100 % of the plant height. No tillers survived without water for more than 3 weeks. Exposure to salt spray had no effect on shoot survival. Immersion in seawater significantly reduced survival—exposure to seawater, equivalent to only one high tide immersion event, was sufficient to reduce plant survival in the glasshouse.

Conclusions

Burial, desiccation and salt-spray may, on occasion, be responsible for either preventing the regeneration of A. arenaria rhizomes or limiting the survival of the resultant plants, but exposure to wave activity determines the viability of a population.

Keywords

Marram grass Invasion Rhizome Marine dispersal 

References

  1. Aptekar R, Rejmänek M (2000) The effect of sea-water submergence on rhizome bud viability of the introduced Ammophila arenaria and the native Leymus mollis in California. J Coast Conserv 6:107–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell A (1988) Alien dune plants reshape our beaches. Ecos 54:3–6Google Scholar
  3. Boyd RS (1992) Influence of Ammophila arenaria on foredune plant microdistributions at Point Reyes National Seashore, California. Madronio 39(1):67–76Google Scholar
  4. Buell AC, Pickart AJ, Stuart JD (1995) Introduction history and invasion patterns of Ammophila arenaria on the north coast of California. Conserv Biol 9:587–1593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cooper WS (1958) Coastal sand dunes of Oregon and Washington. Geol Soc Am Mem 72:1–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davy AJ, Figueroa E (1993) The colonization of strandlines. In: Miles J, Walton DWH (eds) Primary succession on land. Blackwell, London, pp 113–131Google Scholar
  7. Eldred RA, Maun MA (1982) A multivariate approach to the problem of decline in vigour of Ammophila. Can J Bot 60:1371–1380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gemmell AR, Greig-Smith P, Gimingham CH (1953) A note on the behaviour of Ammophila arenaria (L.) Link in relation to sand dune formation. Trans Bot Soc Edinb 36:132–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Harris D, Davy AJ (1986) The regenerative potential of Elymus farctus from rhizome fragments and seeds. J Ecol 74:1057–1067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hayes M, Kirkpatrick JB (2012) Influence of Ammophila arenaria on half a century of vegetation change in eastern Tasmanian sand dune systems. Aust J Bot 60(5):450–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hilton MJ (2006) The loss of New Zealand’s active dunes and the spread of marram grass (Ammophila arenaria). NZ Geogr 62:105–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hilton MJ, Konlechner TM (2011) Incipient foredunes developed from marine-dispersed rhizome of Ammophila arenaria. J Coast Res SI 64:288–292Google Scholar
  13. Hilton MJ, Jul A, Duncan M (2005) Processes of Ammophila arenaria (marram grass) invasion and indigenous species displacement, Stewart Island, New Zealand. J Coast Res 21:175–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hilton MJ, Harvey N, Hart A, James K, Arbuckle C (2006) The impact of exotic dune grass species on foredune development in Australia and New Zealand: a case study of Ammophila arenaria and Thinopyrum junceiforme. Aust Geogr 37(3):313–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hope-Simpson JF, Jefferies RL (1966) Observations relating to vigour and debility in marram grass (Ammophila arenaria (L.) Link). J Ecol 54:271–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Huiskes AHL (1979) Biological flora of the British Isles. J Ecol 67:363–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Konlechner TM, Hilton MJ (2009) The potential for marine dispersal of Ammophila arenaria (marram grass) rhizome in New Zealand. J Coast Res SI 56(1):434–437Google Scholar
  18. Lee JA, Ignaciuk R (1985) The physiological ecology of strandline plants. Vegetatio 62:319–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Masselink G, Hughes MG (2003) Introduction to coastal processes and geomorphology. Hodder Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Maun MA (1984) Colonizing ability of Ammophila breviligulata through vegetative regeneration. J Ecol 72:565–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Maun MA (1994) Adaptations enhancing survival and establishment of seedlings on coastal dune-systems. Vegetatio 111:59–70Google Scholar
  22. Maun MA (2009) The biology of coastal sand dunes. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Miller DL, Yager L, Thetford M, Schneider M (2003) Potential use of Uniola paniculata rhizome fragments for dune restoration. Restor Ecol 11:359–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Owen SJ (1996) Ecological weeds on conservation land in New Zealand: a database. Department of Conservation, WellingtonGoogle Scholar
  25. Petersen PS, Hilton MJ, Wakes SJ (2011) Evidence of aeolian sediment transport across Ammophila arenaria dominated foredune, Mason Bay, Stewart Island. NZ Geogr 67:174–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Short AD, Hesp PA (1982) Wave, beach and dune interactions in Southeastern Australia. Mar Geol 48:259–2848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sykes MT, Wilson JB (1988) An experimental investigation into the response of some New Zealand sand dune species to salt spray. Ann Bot 62:159–166Google Scholar
  28. Wiedemann AM, Pickart AJ (2004) Temperate zone coastal dunes. In: Martinez ML, Psuty NP (eds) Coastal dunes, ecology and conservation. Springer, Berlin, pp 53–65Google Scholar
  29. Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis. Prentice Hall International, New JerseyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Teresa M. Konlechner
    • 1
  • Michael J. Hilton
    • 1
  • David A. Orlovich
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of GeographyUniversity of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand
  2. 2.Department of BotanyUniversity of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations