PhragNet: crowdsourcing to investigate ecology and management of invasive Phragmites australis (common reed) in North America

  • Victoria M. Hunt
  • Jeremie B. Fant
  • Laura Steger
  • Paul E. Hartzog
  • Eric V. Lonsdorf
  • Sarah K. Jacobi
  • Daniel J. Larkin
Original Paper

Abstract

Invasion biology research, often performed by scientists at relatively small spatial scales, provides experimental precision but may be limited in generalizability. Conversely, large-scale invasive species management represents a largely untapped wealth of information on invasion ecology and management, but such data are difficult to capture and synthesize. We developed a network (“PhragNet”) of individuals managing wetlands occupied by native and non-native lineages of the invasive wetland grass Phragmites australis (common reed). This network collected environmental and genetic samples, habitat data, and management information to identify environmental and plant community associations of Phragmites invasion and patterns of management responses. Fifty managers overseeing 209 Phragmites stands in 16 US states and ON, Canada participated. Participants represented federal agencies (26%), municipalities (20%), NGOs (20%), academia (14%), state agencies (12%), and private landowners (8%). Relative to the native lineage, non-native Phragmites occurred in areas with higher nitrate/nitrite and ammonium than non-native Phragmites. Stand interiors had higher soil electrical conductivity than nearby uninvaded areas, consistent with use of road salt promoting spread of Phragmites. Non-native Phragmites co-occurred with fewer plant species than native Phragmites and was actively targeted for management. Herbicide was applied to 51% of non-native stands; surprisingly, 11% of native stands were also treated with herbicide. This project demonstrates the utility of crowdsourcing standardized data from resource managers. We conclude by describing how this approach could be expanded into an adaptive management framework, strengthening connections between wetland management and research.

Keywords

Habitat management Herbicide Invasive species Nutrients Salinity Wetlands 

Supplementary material

11273_2017_9539_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (460 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 459 kb) Data collection forms and protocol for PhragNet

References

  1. Able KW, Hagan SM (2000) Effects of common reed (Phragmites australis) invasion on marsh surface macrofauna: response of fishes and decapod crustaceans. Estuaries Coasts 23:633–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, et al (2015) Package “lme4”. r-project.org
  3. Bellard C, Cassey P, Blackburn TM (2016) Alien species as a driver of recent extinctions. Biol Lett 12:20150623. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2015.0623 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Benoit LK, Askins RA (1999) Impact of the spread of Phragmites on the distribution of birds in Connecticut tidal marshes. Wetlands 19:194–208. doi:10.1007/BF03161749 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bertness MD, Ewanchuk PJ, Silliman BR (2002) Anthropogenic modification of New England salt marsh landscapes. PNAS 99:1395–1398. doi:10.1073/pnas.022447299 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Brisson J, de Blois S, Lavoie C (2010) Roadside as invasion pathway for common reed (Phragmites australis). Invasive Plant Sci Manag 3:506–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burdick DM, Konisky RA (2003) Determinants of expansion for Phragmites australis, common reed, in natural and impacted coastal marshes. Estuaries 26:407–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Caraco N, Tamse A, Boutros O, Valiela I (1987) Nutrient limitation of phytoplankton growth in brackish coastal ponds. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 44:473–476. doi:10.1139/f87-056 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Conrad CC, Hilchey KG (2011) A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities. Environ Monit Assess 176:273–291. doi:10.1007/s10661-010-1582-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Eallonardo AS, Leopold DJ (2014) Inland salt marshes of the Northeastern United States: stress, disturbance and compositional stability. Wetlands 34:155–166. doi:10.1007/s13157-013-0493-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ehrenfeld JG (2003) Effects of exotic plant invasions on soil nutrient cycling processes. Ecosystems 6:503–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fant JB, Price AL, Larkin DJ (2016) The influence of habitat disturbance on genetic structure and reproductive strategies within stands of native and non-native Phragmites australis (common reed). Divers Distrib 22:1301–1313. doi:10.1111/ddi.12492 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gratton C, Denno RF (2006) Arthropod food web restoration following removal of an invasive wetland plant. Ecol Appl 16:622–631. doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[0622:AFWRFR]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hazelton ELG, Mozdzer TJ, Burdick DM et al (2014) Phragmites australis management in the United States: 40 years of methods and outcomes. AoB Plants 6:1–19. doi:10.1093/aobpla/plu001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Holdredge C, Bertness MD, von Wettberg E, Silliman BR (2010) Nutrient enrichment enhances hidden differences in phenotype to drive a cryptic plant invasion. Oikos 119:1776–1784. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0706.2010.18647.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jodoin Y, Lavoie C, Villeneuve P et al (2008) Highways as corridors and habitats for the invasive common reed Phragmites australis in Quebec, Canada. J Appl Ecol 45:459–466. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2007.01362.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. League MT, Colbert EP, Seliskar DM, Gallagher JL (2006) Rhizome growth dynamics of native and exotic haplotypes of Phragmites australis (common reed). Estuaries Coasts 29:269–276. doi:10.1007/BF02781995 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Martin LJ, Blossey B (2013) The runaway weed: costs and failures of Phragmites australis management in the USA. Estuaries Coasts 36:626–632. doi:10.1007/s12237-013-9593-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Minchinton TE, Bertness MD (2003) Disturbance-mediated competition and the spread of Phragmites australis in a coastal marsh. Ecol Appl 13:1400–1416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mozdzer TJ, Zieman JC, McGlathery KJ (2010) Nitrogen uptake by native and invasive temperate coastal macrophytes: importance of dissolved organic nitrogen. Estuaries Coasts 33:784–797. doi:10.1007/s12237-009-9254-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Price AL, Fant JB, Larkin DJ (2014) Ecology of native vs. introduced Phragmites austrais (common reed) in Chicago-area wetlands. Wetlands 34:369–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ramseur GG (2012) Predicting wetland susceptibility to Phragmites australis: an assessment of environmental conditions in coastal Louisiana with recommendations for wetland management. Thesis, Bard College, Annadale on Hudson, NYGoogle Scholar
  23. R Development Core Team (2009) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  24. Saltonstall K (2002) Cryptic invasion by a non-native genotype of the common reed, Phragmites australis, into North America. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99:2445–2449. doi:10.1073/pnas.032477999 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Saltonstall K (2003) A rapid method for identifying the origin of North American Phragmites populations using RFLP analysis. Wetlands 23:1043–1047. doi:10.1672/0277-5212(2003)023[1043:ARMFIT]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Saltonstall K (2011) Remnant native Phragmites australis maintains genetic diversity despite multiple threats. Conserv Genet 12:1027–1033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Saltonstall K, Peterson PM, Soreng R (2004) Recognition of Phragmites australis subsp. americanus (Poaceae: Arundinaceae) in North America: evidence from morphological and genetic analyses. SIDA 21:683–692Google Scholar
  28. The National Invasive Species Council (2014) 2014 Invasive species interagency crosscut budget. The National Invasive Species Council, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  29. Theobald EJ, Ettinger AK, Burgess HK et al (2015) Global change and local solutions: tapping the unrealized potential of citizen science for biodiversity research. Biol Conserv 181:236–244. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2014.10.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tulbure MG, Johnston CA (2010) Environmental conditions promoting non-native Phragmites australis expansion in Great Lakes coastal wetlands. Wetlands 30:577–587. doi:10.1007/s13157-010-0054-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Williams BK, Szaro RC, Shapiro CD (2009) Adaptive management: The U.S. Department of the Interior technical guide. Adaptive Management Working Group, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  32. Windham L, Meyerson LA (2003) Effects of common reed (Phragmites australis) expansions on nitrogen dynamics of tidal marshes of the Northeastern US. Estuaries Coasts 26:452–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wondolleck JM, Yaffee SL (2000) Making collaboration work: lessons from innovation in natural resource management. Island Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Victoria M. Hunt
    • 1
  • Jeremie B. Fant
    • 1
  • Laura Steger
    • 1
  • Paul E. Hartzog
    • 1
    • 2
  • Eric V. Lonsdorf
    • 1
    • 3
  • Sarah K. Jacobi
    • 1
  • Daniel J. Larkin
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Plant Science and ConservationChicago Botanic GardenGlencoeUSA
  2. 2.Plant Biology and ConservationNorthwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA
  3. 3.Institute on the EnvironmentUniversity of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA
  4. 4.Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology & Minnesota Aquatic Invasive Species Research CenterUniversity of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA

Personalised recommendations