Advertisement

Hydrobiologia

, Volume 665, Issue 1, pp 93–105 | Cite as

Influences of water column nutrient loading on growth characteristics of the invasive aquatic macrophyte Myriophyllum aquaticum (Vell.) Verdc.

  • Ryan M. Wersal
  • John D. MadsenEmail author
Primary research paper

Abstract

Nuisance growth of Myriophyllum aquaticum has often been attributed to high amounts of nutrients. The uptake of nitrogen and phosphorus from sediments and their allocation have been documented in both natural and laboratory populations. However, nutrient loading to surface water is increasingly becoming an important issue for water quality standards. Aquatic macrophytes that develop adventitious roots may be able to survive through the uptake of water column nutrients. Our objectives for this study were to assess M. aquaticum growth when combinations of nitrogen and phosphorus were added to the water column. Mesocosm experiments were conducted where nitrogen (1.8, 0.8, and 0.4 mg l−1; high, medium, and low) and phosphorus (0.09, 0.03, 0.01 mg l−1; high, medium, and low) concentrations were paired and added to the water column. After 12 weeks, the combination of 1.80:0.01 N:P resulted in greater (P < 0.01) total biomass and greater biomass for all plant tissues. Total biomass at the 1.80:0.01 N:P combination was 53% greater than biomass at all other combinations. The yield response of M. aquaticum was a quadratic function of tissue nutrient content. Yield was positively (r 2 = 0.82) related to increasing nitrogen content, whereas a negative (r 2 = 0.89) relationship was determined for increasing phosphorus content. We propose the negative relationship is due to increased nutrient competition and shading by algae resulting in reduced M. aquaticum growth. Tissue nutrient content indicated that critical concentrations (1.8% nitrogen and 0.2% phosphorus) for growth were not attained except for nitrogen in plants grown in the 1.80:0.01 N:P combination. These data provide further evidence that M. aquaticum requires high levels of nitrogen to achieve nuisance growth. Survival through uptake of water column nutrients may be a mechanism for survival during adverse conditions, a means of long distance dispersal of fragments, or may offer a competitive advantage over species that rely on sediment nutrients.

Keywords

Nitrogen Phosphorus Aquatic plant Parrotfeather Non-native Exotic 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Funding for this research was provided by the Aquatic Plant Management Society and Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Foundation through a graduate research grant, the United States Geological Survey Invasive Species Program under Award Number 08HQAG013908121105, and additional support through graduate student scholarships from the MidSouth Aquatic Plant Management Society and the Midwest Aquatic Plant Management Society. The authors would like to thank Dr. Patrick Gerard for assistance with statistical analyses. We thank Jimmy Peeples, Matt Gower, Alan Pryor, Thomas Hendrix, and other student employees for assistance setting up and harvesting the study. We also thank Dr. David Shaw, Dr. Eric Dibble, Dr. John Byrd, and Dr. Linda Nelson for providing comments on earlier versions of this manuscript. This manuscript has been approved for publication as Journal Article No. J-11922 of the Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station, Mississippi State University.

References

  1. AOAC International, 2000. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International. 17th ed., AOAC International, Gaithersburg, MD, USA, Official Method 990.03.Google Scholar
  2. Barko, J. W. & R. M. Smart, 1981. Sediment-based nutrition of submersed macrophytes. Aquatic Botany 10: 339–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barko, J. W. & R. M. Smart, 1986. Sediment-related mechanisms of growth limitation in submersed macrophytes. Ecology 67: 1328–1340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bedford, B. L., M. R. Walbridge & A. Aldous, 1999. Patterns in nutrient availability and plant diversity of temperate North American wetlands. Ecology 80: 2151–2169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bristow, J. M. & M. Whitcombe, 1971. The role of roots in the nutrition of aquatic vascular plants. American Journal of Botany 58: 8–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burke, M. J. W. & J. P. Grime, 1996. An experimental study of plant community invasibility. Ecology 77: 776–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carignan, R. & J. Kalff, 1982. Phosphorus release by submerged macrophytes: significance to epiphyton and phytoplankton. Limnology and Oceanography 27: 419–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cassman, K. G., A. S. Whitney & K. R. Stockinger, 1980. Root growth and dry matter distribution of soybean as affected by phosphorus stress, nodulation, and nitrogen source. Crop Science 20: 239–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cattaneo, A. & J. Kalff, 1979. Primary production of algae growing on natural and artificial aquatic plants: a study of interactions between epiphytes and their substrate. Limnology and Oceanography 24: 1031–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chadwell, T. B. & K. A. M. Engelhardt, 2008. Effects of pre-existing submersed vegetation and propagule pressure on the invasion success of Hydrilla verticillata. Journal of Applied Ecology 45: 515–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chapin, F. S., E. S. Zavaleta, V. T. Eviner, R. L. Naylor, P. M. Vitousek, H. L. Reynolds, D. U. Hooper, S. Lavorel, O. E. Sala, S. E. Hobbie, M. C. Mack & S. Diaz, 2000. Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature 405: 234–242.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis, M. A., J. P. Grime & K. Thompson, 2000. Fluctuating resources in plant communities: a general theory of invisibility. Journal of Ecology 88: 528–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eaton, A. D., L. S. Clesceri, E. W. Rice & A. E. Greenberg (eds), 2005. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 21st ed. American Public Health Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  14. Elton, C. S., 1958. The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants. University of Chicago Press, USA.Google Scholar
  15. Hunt, R., 1982. Plant Growth Curves. Edward Arnold, London.Google Scholar
  16. Kennedy, T. L., L. A. Horth & D. A. Carr, 2009. The effects of nitrate loading on the invasive macrophyte Hydrilla verticillata and two common native macrophytes in Florida. Aquatic Botany 91: 253–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Linkohr, R. I., L. C. Williamson, A. H. Fitter & H. M. Ottoline Leyser, 2002. Nitrate and phosphate availability and distribution have different effects on root system architecture of Arabidopsis. The Plant Journal 29: 751–760.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Littell, R. C., G. A. Milliken, W. W. Stroup & R. D. Wolfinger, 1996. SAS® System for Mixed Models. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
  19. Phillips, G. L., D. Eminson & B. Moss, 1978. Mechanism to account for macrophyte decline in progressively eutrophicated freshwaters. Aquatic Botany 4: 103–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pimentel, D., L. Lach, R. Zuniga & D. Morrison, 2000. Environmental and economic costs of nonindigenous species in the United States. Bioscience 50: 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ruesink, J. L., 1998. Diatom epiphytes on Odonthalia floccosa: the importance of extent and timing. Journal of Phycology 34: 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Spencer, D. F. & G. G. Ksander, 1995. Influence of propagule size, soil fertility, and photoperiod on growth and propagule production by 3 species of submerged macrophytes. Wetlands 15: 134–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sutton, D. L., 1985. Biology and ecology of Myriophyllum aquaticum. Proceeding, 1st International Symposium on watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) and Related Haloragaceae Species. 23–24 July 1985. Vancouver, B.C.: 59–71.Google Scholar
  24. Sutton, D. L. & S. W. Bingham, 1973. Anatomy of emersed parrotfeather. Hyacinth Control Journal 11: 49–54.Google Scholar
  25. Sytsma, M. D. & L. W. J. Anderson, 1993a. Criteria for assessing nitrogen and phosphorus deficiency in Myriophyllum aquaticum. Journal of Freshwater Ecology 8: 155–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sytsma, M. D. & L. W. J. Anderson, 1993b. Biomass, nitrogen, and phosphorus allocation in parrotfeather (Myriophyllum aquaticum). Journal of Aquatic Plant Management 31: 244–248.Google Scholar
  27. Sytsma, M. D. & L. W. J. Anderson, 1993c. Transpiration by an emergent macrophyte: source of water and implications for nutrient supply. Hydrobiologia 271: 97–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sytsma, M. D. & L. W. J. Anderson, 1993d. Nutrient limitation in Myriophyllum aquaticum. Journal of Freshwater Ecology 8: 165–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Timmons, F. L. & D. L. Klingman, 1958. Control of aquatic and bank weeds. Soil Conservation 24: 102–107.Google Scholar
  30. Tracy, M., J. M. Montante, T. E. Allenson & R. A. Hough, 2003. Long-term responses of aquatic macrophyte diversity and community structure to variation in nitrogen loading. Aquatic Botany 77: 43–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vitousek, P. M., C. M. D’Antonio, L. L. Loope & R. Westbrooks, 1996. Biological invasions as global environmental change. American Scientist 84: 468–478.Google Scholar
  32. Vitousek, P. M., M. Finn, S. Findlay & D. Fischer, 1997. Human domination of earth’s ecosystems. Science 277: 494–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wersal, R. M. & J. D. Madsen, 2010. Comparison of subsurface and foliar herbicide applications for control of parrotfeather (Myriophyllum aquaticum). Invasive Plant Science and Management 3: 262–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wetzel, R. G., 2001. Limnology: Lake and River Ecosystems, 3rd ed. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA.Google Scholar
  35. Xie, D., D. Yu, L.-F. Yu & C.-H. Liu, 2010. Asexual propagation of introduced exotic macrophytes Elodea nuttallii, Myriophyllum aquaticum, and M. propinquum are improved by nutrient-rich sediments in China. Hyrdrobiologia 655: 37–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Geosystems Research InstituteMississippi State UniversityStarkvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations