Estuaries and Coasts

, Volume 37, Issue 5, pp 1233–1242 | Cite as

Magnitude and Patterns of Change in Submerged Aquatic Vegetation of the Tidal Freshwater Hudson River

  • S. E. G. Findlay
  • D. L. Strayer
  • S. D. Smith
  • N. Curri


Three aerial photography inventories were used to examine change in submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) in the tidal freshwater Hudson River over the interval 1997 to 2007. Overall, there was about a 30 % net decline in SAV coverage although there were also many individual areas of expansion. The invasive water chestnut (Trapa natans) did not change appreciably in net cover over the interval, and there was replacement of SAV by water chestnut along with slightly fewer cases of SAV replacing the exotic. A fine-scale (100 m by 100 m quadrats) analysis showed that about 30 % of quadrats that supported vegetation changed by more than 10 % in plant cover and overall SAV was quite dynamic. SAV in the Hudson is limited by light which is in turn controlled by suspended sediment. SAV was rarely found at depths >1 m below low water, and interannual differences in clarity affected the ability of SAV beds to maintain locally supersaturated levels of dissolved oxygen. We found that location within the River channel (proximity to shore) influenced the magnitude and variability in change in SAV between census periods. The physical nature of the adjacent shoreline also affected the magnitude of change with greater declines in cover in areas next to hard-engineered shore types. SAV in the Hudson is highly dynamic, apparently quite resilient, and the control of light by suspended sediment rather than phytoplankton growth offers a contrast to eutrophication-influenced changes in other estuaries. Management and protection of SAV habitat must recognize the highly variable nature of plant cover and that absence in any particular year does not preclude future appearance of submerged plants at that location.


Vallisneria americana Trapa natans Turbidity Shoreline SAV Change 


  1. Bain, M.B. 1993. Assessing impacts of introduced aquatic species: grass carp in large systems. Environmental Management 17: 211–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boylen, C.W., L.W. Eichler, and J.D. Madsen. 1999. Loss of native aquatic plant species in a community dominated by Eurasian watermilfoil. Hydrobiologia 415: 207–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bull, J.C., E.J. Kenyon, and K.J. Cook. 2012. Wasting disease regulates long-term population dynamics in a threatened seagrass. Oecologia 169: 135–142. doi:10.1007/s00442-011-2187-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Caraco, N.F., J.J. Cole, and P.A. Raymond. 1997. Zebra mussel invasion in a large, turbid river: Phytoplankton response to increased grazing. Ecology 78: 588–602.Google Scholar
  5. Caraco, N.F., and J.J. Cole. 2002. Contrasting impacts of a native and alien macrophyte on dissolved oxygen in a large river. Ecological Applications 12: 1496–1509. doi:10.2307/3099987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Caraco, N.F., J.J. Cole, S.E.G. Findlay, D.T. Fischer, G.G. Lampman, M.L. Pace, and D.L. Strayer. 2000. Dissolved oxygen declines in the Hudson River associated with the invasion of the zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha). Environmental Science and Technology 34: 1204–1210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Costello, C.T., and W.J. Kenworthy. 2011. Twelve-year mapping and change analysis of eelgrass (Zostera marina) areal abundance in Massachusetts (USA) identifies statewide declines. Estuaries and Coasts 34: 232–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dennison, W.C., R.J. Orth, K.A. Moore, J.C. Stevenson, V. Carter, S. Kollar, P.W. Bergstrom, and R.A. Batiuk. 1993. Assessing water quality with submersed aquatic vegetation. Bioscience 43: 86–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Findlay, S., M. Pace, and D. Fischer. 1996. Spatial and temporal variability in the lower food web of the tidal freshwater Hudson River. Estuaries 19:866–873.Google Scholar
  10. Findlay, S.E.G., W.C. Nieder, and D.T. Fischer. 2006a. Multi-scale controls on water quality effects of submerged aquatic vegetation in the tidal freshwater Hudson River. Ecosystems 9: 84–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Findlay, S.E.G., C. Wigand, and W.C. Nieder. 2006b. Submersed macrophyte distribution and function in the tidal freshwater Hudson River. In The Hudson River ecosystem, ed. J. Levinton and J. Waldman, 230–241. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fonseca, M.S., and S.S. Bell. 1998. Influence of physical setting on seagrass landscapes near Beaufort, North Carolina, USA. Marine Ecology Progress Series 171: 109–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fortin, M.-J., and M. Dale. 2005. Spatial analysis: a guide for ecologists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Harley, M.T., and S. Findlay. 1994. Photosynthesis-irradiance relationships for three species of submersed macrophytes in the tidal freshwater Hudson River. Estuaries 17: 200–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hilt, S., J. Köhler, H.-P. Kozerski, E.H. van Nes, and M. Scheffer. 2011. Abrupt regime shifts in space and time along rivers and connected lake systems. Oikos 120: 766–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hughes, A.R., S.L. Williams, C.M. Duarte, K.L. Heck, and M. Waycott. 2009. Associations of concern: declining seagrasses and threatened dependent species. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7: 242–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hummel, M., and S. Findlay. 2006. Effects of water chestnut (Trapa natans) beds on water chemistry in the tidal freshwater Hudson River. Hydrobiologia 559: 169–181. doi:10.1007/s10750-005-9201-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lampman, G.G., N.F. Caraco, and J.J. Cole. 1999. Spatial and temporal patterns of nutrient concentration and export in the tidal Hudson River. Estuaries 22: 285–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Li, X.Y., D.E. Weller, C.L. Gallegos, T.E. Jordant, and H.C. Kim. 2007. Effects of watershed and estuarine characteristics on the abundance of submerged aquatic vegetation in Chesapeake Bay subestuaries. Estuaries and Coasts 30: 840–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Miles, J.R., P.E. Russell, and D.A. Huntley. 2001. Field measurements of sediment dynamics in front of a seawall. Journal of Coastal Research 17: 195–206.Google Scholar
  21. Moore, K.A., E.C. Shields, D.B. Parrish, and R.J. Orth. 2012. Eelgrass survival in two contrasting systems: role of turbidity and summer water temperatures. Marine Ecology Progress Series 448: 247–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nieder, W.C., E. Barnaba, S.E.G. Findlay, S. Hoskins, N. Holochuck, and E.A. Blair. 2004. Distribution and abundance of submerged aquatic vegetation in the Hudson River Estuary. Journal of Coastal Research 45: 150–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nieder, W.C., S. Hoskins, S.D. Smith, and S.E.G. Findlay. 2008. Distribution and spatial change of Hudson River Estuary submerged aquatic vegetation: implications for coastal management and natural resource protection. In Remote sensing and GIS for coastal ecosystem assessment and management: principles and applications, ed. X. Yang, 259–277. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  24. Orth, R.J., T.J.B. Carruthers, W.C. Dennison, C.M. Duarte, J.W. Fourqurean, K.L. Heck, A.R. Hughes, G.A. Kendrick, W.J. Kenworthy, S. Olyarnik, F.T. Short, M. Waycott, and S.L. Williams. 2006. A global crisis for seagrass ecosystems. Bioscience 56: 987–996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Orth, R.J., M.R. Williams, S.R. Marion, D.J. Wilcox, T.J.B. Carruthers, K.A. Moore, W.M. Kemp, W.C. Dennison, N. Rybicki, P. Bergstrom, and R.A. Batiuk. 2010. Long-term trends in submersed aquatic vegetation (SAV) in Chesapeake Bay, USA, related to water quality. Estuaries and Coasts 33(5): 1144–1163.Google Scholar
  26. Rozas, L.P., and T.J. Minello. 2006. Nekton use of Vallisneria americana Michx. (wild celery) beds and adjacent habitats in coastal Louisiana. Estuaries and Coasts 29: 297–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rybicki, N.B., and J.M. Landwehr. 2007. Long-term changes in abundance and diversity of macrophyte and waterfowl populations in an estuary with exotic macrophytes and improving water quality. Limnology and Oceanography 52: 1195–1207.Google Scholar
  28. Santos, R.O., D. Lirman, and J.E. Serafy. 2011. Quantifying freshwater-induced fragmentation of submerged aquatic vegetation communities using a multi-scale landscape ecology approach. Marine Ecology Progress Series 427: 233–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Scheffer, M., S.H. Hosper, M.L. Meijer, B. Moss, and E. Jeppesen. 1993. Alternative equilibria in shallow lakes. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 8: 275–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shields, E.C., K.A. Moore, and D.B. Parrish. 2012. Influence of salinity and light availability on abundance and distribution of tidal freshwater and oligohaline submersed vegetation. Estuaries ad Coasts 35:515–526.Google Scholar
  31. Short, F.T., and D.M. Burdick. 1996. Quantifying eelgrass habitat loss in relation to housing development and nitrogen loading in Waquoit Bay, Massachusetts. Estuaries 19: 730–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Strayer, D.L., and H.M. Malcom. 2007. Submersed vegetation as habitat for invertebrates in the Hudson River estuary. Estuaries and Coasts 30: 253–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Strayer, D.L., C. Lutz, H.M. Malcom, K. Munger, and W.H. Shaw. 2003. Invertebrate communities associated with a native (Vallisneria americana) and an alien (Trapa natans) macrophyte in a large river. Freshwater Biology 48: 1938–1949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Strayer, D.L., E.A. Blair, N.F. Caraco, J.J. Cole, S. Findlay, W.C. Nieder, and M.L. Pace. 2005. Interactions between alien species and restoration of large-river ecosystems. Archiv für Hydrobiologie Supplementband 155: 133–145.Google Scholar
  35. Tall, L., N. Caraco, and R. Maranger. 2011. Denitrification hot spots: dominant role of invasive macrophyte Trapa natans in removing nitrogen from a tidal river. Ecological Applications 21: 3104–3114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Townsend, E.C., and M.S. Fonseca. 1998. Bioturbation as a potential mechanism influencing spatial heterogeneity of North Carolina seagrass beds. Marine Ecology Progress Series 169: 123–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. E. G. Findlay
    • 1
  • D. L. Strayer
    • 1
  • S. D. Smith
    • 2
  • N. Curri
    • 3
  1. 1.Cary Institute of Ecosystem StudiesMillbrookUSA
  2. 2.Cornell Institute for Resource Information ServicesCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  3. 3.Cornell Cooperative Extension of Dutchess CountyMillbrookUSA

Personalised recommendations