Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 158, Issue 1, pp 151–163 | Cite as

Impacts and interactions of multiple human perturbations in a California salt marsh

  • Rebecca Goldman MartoneEmail author
  • Kerstin Wasson
Global Change Ecology - Original Paper

Abstract

Multiple disturbances to ecosystems can influence community structure by modifying resistance to and recovery from invasion by non-native species. Predicting how invasibility responds to multiple anthropogenic impacts is particularly challenging due to the variety of potential stressors and complex responses. Using manipulative field experiments, we examined the relative impact of perturbations that primarily change abiotic or biotic factors to promote invasion in coastal salt marsh plant communities. Specifically we test the hypotheses that nitrogen enrichment and human trampling facilitate invasion of upland weeds into salt marsh, and that the ability of salt marsh communities to resist and/or recover from invasion is modified by hydrological conditions. Nitrogen enrichment affected invasion of non-native upland plants at only one of six sites, and increased aboveground native marsh biomass at only two sites. Percent cover of native marsh plants declined with trampling at all sites, but recovered earlier at tidally flushed sites than at tidally restricted sites. Synergistic interactions between trampling and restricting tidal flow resulted in significantly higher cover of non-native upland plants in trampled plots at tidally restricted sites. Percent cover of non-native plants recovered to pre-trampling levels in fully tidal sites, but remained higher in tidally restricted sites after 22 months. Thus, perturbations that reduce biotic resistance interact with perturbations that alter abiotic conditions to promote invasion. This suggests that to effectively conserve or restore native biodiversity in altered systems, one must consider impacts of multiple human disturbances, and the interactions between them.

Keywords

Multiple stressor Synergistic interactions Fluctuating resource hypothesis Invasion Resilience 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are indebted to Kendall Madden for helping with all of the fieldwork and putting up with sun and ticks. Thanks to Andrea Woolfolk for inspiring the trampling study and for thoughtful advice. We thank Eric Van Dyke for creating Fig. 1. Thanks to Pamela Matson, Peter Jewett, Carrie Nielsen, and Scott Wankel of Stanford University for help with soil nitrogen analyses and soil sampling. Patrick Martone, Fiorenza Micheli, and Kristy Kroeker, and two anonymous reviewers helped improve the manuscript. Support for this research came from the Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve and Hopkins Marine Station, with funding provided by the Estuarine Reserve Division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. All experiments were conducted in a manner that complied with laws of the United States of America.

Supplementary material

442_2008_1129_MOESM1_ESM.doc (32 kb)
Supplementary material S1 (DOC 32 kb)
442_2008_1129_MOESM2_ESM.doc (34 kb)
Supplementary material S2 (DOC 34 kb)

References

  1. Allison SK (1995) Recovery from small-scale anthropogenic disturbances by northern California salt marsh plant assemblages. Ecol Appl 1995:693–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bertness MD, Callaway RM (1994) Positive interactions in communities. Trends Ecol Evol 9:191–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bertness MD, Ewanchuk PJ, Silliman BR (2002) Anthropogenic modification of New England salt marsh landscapes. Proc Natl Aca Sci USA 99:1395–1398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyer KE, Fong P, Vance RR, Ambrose RF (2001) Salicornia virginica in a southern California salt marsh: seasonal patterns and a nutrient-enrichment experiment. Wetlands 21:315–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyer KE, Zedler JB (1998) Effects of nitrogen additions on the vertical structure of a constructed cordgrass marsh. Ecol Appl 8:692–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyer KE, Zedler JB (1999) Nitrogen addition could shift plant community composition in a restored California salt marsh. Res Ecol 7:74–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Browning BM (1972) The natural resources of Elkhorn Slough: their present and future use. In: Coastal Wetland Series no. 4. California Department of Fish and Game, SacramentoGoogle Scholar
  8. Bruno J, Stachowicz JJ, Bertness MD (2003) Inclusion of facilitation into ecological theory. Trends Ecol Evol 18:119–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Caffrey JM, Brown M, Tyler WB, Silberstein M (2002) Changes in a California estuary: a profile of Elkhorn Slough. Elkhorn Slough Foundation, Moss Landing, CAGoogle Scholar
  10. Christensen NL et al (1996) The report of the Ecological Society of America committee on the scientific basis for ecosystem management. Ecol Appl 6:665–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Connell JH, Sousa WP (1983) On the evidence needed to judge ecological stability or persistence. Am Nat 121:789–824CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Covin JD, Zedler JB (1988) Nitrogen effects on Spartina foliosa and Salicornia virginica in the salt marsh at Tijuana Estuary, California. Wetlands 8:51–65Google Scholar
  13. D’Antonio CM (1993) Mechanisms controlling invasion of coastal plant communities by the alien succulent Carpobrotus edulis. Ecology 74:83–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davis MA, Grime JP, Thompson K (2000) Fluctuating resources in plant communities: a general theory of invasibility. J Ecol 88:528–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davis MA, Pelsor M (2001) Experimental support for a resource-based mechanistic model of invasibility. Ecol Lett 4:421–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dethier MN, Hacker SD (2005) Physical factors vs. biotic resistance in controlling the invasion of an estuarine marsh grass. Ecol Appl 15:1273–1283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Folt CL, Chen CY, Moore MV, Burnaford J (1999) Synergism and antagonism among multiple stressors. Limnol Oceanogr 44:864–877Google Scholar
  18. Gibson KD, Zedler JB, Langis R (1994) Limited response of cordgrass (Spartina foliosa) to soil amendments in a constructed marsh. Ecol Appl 4:757–767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hester AJ, Hobbs RJ (1992) Influence of fire and soil nutrients on native and non-native annuals at remnant vegetation edges in the western Australian wheatbelt. J Veg Sci 3:101–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hobbs RJ, Atkins L (1988) Effect of disturbance and nutrient addition on native and introduced annuals in plant communities in the Western Australian wheatbelt. Aus J Ecol 13:171–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hobbs RJ, Huenneke LF (1992) Disturbance, diversity, and invasion implications for conservation. Conserv Biol 6:324–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hughes TP, Bellwood DR, Folke C, Steneck RS, Wilson J (2005) New paradigms for supporting the resilience of marine ecosystems. Trends Ecol Evol 20:380–386PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. James ML, Zedler JB (2000) Dynamics of wetland and upland subshrubs at the salt marsh-coastal sage scrub ecotone. Am Midl Nat 143:298–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Johnstone IM (1986) Plant invasion windows: a time-based classification of invasion potential. Biol Rev 61:369–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kercher SM, Zedler JB (2004) Multiple disturbances accelerate invasion of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L) in a mesocosm study. Oecologia 138:455–464PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kuhn NL, Zedler JB (1997) Differential effects of salinity and soil saturation on native and exotic plants of a coastal salt marsh. Estuaries 20:391–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lake JC, Leishman MR (2004) Invasion success of exotic plants in natural ecosystems: the role of disturbance, plant attributes and freedom from herbivores. Biol Conserv 117:215–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lenihan HS, Micheli F, Shelton SW, Peterson CH (1999) The influence of multiple environmental stressors on susceptibility to parasites: an experimental determination with oysters. Limnol Oceanogr 44:910–924Google Scholar
  29. Lenihan HS, Peterson CH (1998) How habitat degradation through fishery disturbance enhances impacts of hypoxia on oyster reefs. Ecol Appl 8:128–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lindig-Cisneros R, Desmond J, Boyer KE, Zedler JB (2003) Wetland restoration thresholds: can a degradation transition be reversed with increased effort? Ecol Appl 13:193–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lotze HK, Worm B (2002) Complex interactions of climatic and ecological controls on macroalgal recruitment. Limnol Oceanogr 47:1734–1741Google Scholar
  32. Macdonald KB (1977) Coastal salt marsh. In: Barbour MG, Major J (eds) Terrestrial vegetation in California. Wiley, New York, pp 263–294Google Scholar
  33. Menge BA, Sutherland JP (1987) Community regulation: variation in disturbance, competition, and predation in relation to environmental stress and recruitment. Am Nat 130:730–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Moyle PB, Light T (1996) Fish invasions in California: do abiotic factors determine success? Ecology 77:1666–1670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Noe GB, Zedler JB (2001) Spatio-temporal variation of salt marsh seedling establishment in relation to the abiotic and biotic environment. J Veg Sci 12:61–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Commission Pew Oceans (2003) America’s living oceans: charting a course for sea change. Summary report. In: Pew Oceans Commission. Arlington, VAGoogle Scholar
  37. Phillips B, Stephenson M, Jacobi M, Ichikawa G, Silberstein M, Brown M (2002) Land use and contaminants. In: Caffrey JM, Brown M, Tyler WB, Silberstein M (eds) Changes in a California estuary: a profile of Elkhorn Slough. Elkhorn Slough Foundation, Moss Landing, CA, pp 237–256Google Scholar
  38. Pickett STA, White PS (1985) The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, OrlandoGoogle Scholar
  39. Shea K, Chesson P (2002) Community ecology theory as a framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 17:170–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shumway SW, Bertness MD (1994) Patch size effects on marsh plant secondary succession mechanisms. Ecology 75:564–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sih A, Bell AM, Kerby JL (2004) Two stressors are far deadlier than one. Trends Ecol Evol 19:274–276PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tilman D (1997) Community invasibility, recruitment limitation, and grassland biodiversity. Ecology 78:81–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Traut BH (2005) The role of coastal ecotones: a case study of the salt marsh/upland transition zone in California. J Ecol 93:279–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Underwood AJ (1997) Experiments in ecology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  45. Underwood AJ, Chapman MG (2001) GMAV5 Institute of Marine Ecology, 5th edn. University of Sydney, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  46. US Commission on Ocean Policy (2004) An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century. Final Report. In: U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  47. Van Dyke E, Wasson K (2005) Historical ecology of a central California estuary: 150 years of habitat change. Estuaries 26:173–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Vitousek PM (1990) Biological invasions and ecosystem processes: towards an integration of population biology and ecosystem studies. Oikos 57:7–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Woolfolk AM (1999) Effects of human trampling and cattle grazing on salt marsh assemblages in Elkhorn Slough, California. Masters Thesis. Moss Landing Marine Laboratories and California State University Sacramento, Moss Landing, CA, p. 64Google Scholar
  50. Zedler JB (1996) Ecological function and sustainability in created wetlands. In: Falk DA, Millar CI, Olwell M (eds) Restoring diversity: strategies for reintroduction of endangered plants. Island Press, Washington DC, pp 331–342Google Scholar
  51. Zedler JB, Winfield T, Williams P (1980) Salt marsh productivity with natural and altered tidal circulation. Oecologia 44:236–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zimmerman RC, Caffrey J (2002) Primary producers. In: Caffrey J, Brown M, Tyler WB, Silberstein M (eds) Changes in a California estuary: a profile of Elkhorn Slough. Elkhorn Slough Foundation, Moss Landing, CA, pp 117–135Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Stanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  2. 2.Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research ReserveWatsonvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations