, Volume 33, Issue 3, pp 483–493 | Cite as

Carbon Storage by Carex stricta Tussocks: A Restorable Ecosystem Service?



Tussock-forming plants are globally widespread and enhance ecosystem services. We hypothesized that tussocks of Carex stricta store carbon (C) in addition to enhancing microtopography and biodiversity. We characterized tussock size, composition, and carbon pools associated with three undisturbed C. stricta-dominated tussock meadows in the Upper Midwest, USA. Remnant meadow tussocks were tall (17.2 cm), voluminous (4,113 cm3), and largely organic (95 %), indicating their ability to accumulate organic matter and store carbon. Tussocks were the second largest C pool (next to soil) in these ecosystems; they comprised 41–62 % of total biomass C. Using bomb 14C dating, we estimated that reference-site tussocks were over 50 years old. Their long-term persistence is consistent with lower leaf decomposition rates on tussocks (k = 0.26 years−1) than in tussock interspaces (k = 0.39 years−1). An urban tussock meadow had tussocks that were shorter than those of remnant sites, but less dense than a restored meadow. The restored meadow (≤15 years) had smaller, structurally distinct tussocks that stored less C. Among the five sites, C stocks were lowest in the urban and restored meadows, supporting the need to conserve existing C stores in remnant meadows and to restore tussock sedge for multiple ecosystem services.


C stocks Illinois Restoration Sedge meadow Tussock age Wetland Wisconsin 


  1. Aerts R (1996) Nutrient resorption from senescing leaves of perennials: are there general patterns? Journal of Ecology 84:597–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aerts R, de Caluwe H (1997) Nutritional and plant-mediated controls on leaf litter decomposition of Carex species. Ecology 78:244–260Google Scholar
  3. Aerts R, Boot RGA, van der Aart PJM (1991) The relation between above-and belowground biomass allocation patterns and competitive ability. Oecologia 87:551–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Armentano TV, Menges ES (1986) Patterns of change in the carbon balance of organic soil wetlands of the temperate zone. The Journal of Ecology 74:755–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Atkinson RB, Cairns JJ (2001) Plant decomposition and litter accumulation in depressional wetlands: functional performance of two wetland age classes that were created via excavation. Wetlands 21:354–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Batjes NH (1996) Total carbon and nitrogen in the soils of the world. European Journal of Soil Science 47:151–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernard JM, Fiala K (1986) Distribution and standing crop of living and dead roots in three wetland Carex species. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Society 113:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Birdsey R (1992) Carbon storage and accumulation in the United States forest ecosystems. U.S.D.A., Forest Service, Washington. General Technical Report WO-59Google Scholar
  9. Borin M, Salvato M (2012) Effects of five macrophytes on nitrogen remediation and mass balance in wetland mesocosms. Ecological Engineering 40:34–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bortoluzzi E, Epron D, Siegenthaler A, Gilbert D, Buttler A (2006) Carbon balance of a European mountain bog at contrasting stages of regeneration. New Phytologist 172:708–718PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bridgham SD, Megonigal JP, Keller JK, Bliss NB, Trettin C (2006) The carbon balance of North American wetlands. Wetlands 26:889–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Budelsky RA, Galatowitsch SM (2004) Establishment of C. stricta seedlings in experimental wetlands with implications for restoration. Plant Ecology 175:91–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carter MR (1993) Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Lewis Publishers, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  14. Chapin FS, van Cleve K, Chapin MC (1979) Soil temperature and nutrient cycling in the tussock growth form of Eriophorum vaginatum. The Journal of Ecology 67:169–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chen H, Harmon ME, Sexton J, Fasth B (2002) Fine-root decomposition and N dynamics in coniferous forests of the Pacific Northwest, U.S.A. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 32:320–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Christensen N, Mitsch WJ, Jorgensen SE (1994) A first generation ecosystem model of the Des Plaines River experimental wetlands. Ecological Engineering 3:495–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cochrane TS, Elliot K, Lipke CS (2006) Prairie plants of the University of Wisconisin-Madison Arboretum. UW Press, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  18. Cole I, Lunt ID, Koen T (2005) Effects of sowing treatment and landscape position on establishment of the perennial tussock grass Themeda triandra (Poaceae) in degraded Eucalyptus woodlands in southeastern Australia. Restoration Ecology 13:552–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Costello DF (1936) Tussock meadows in southeastern Wisconsin. Botanical Gazette 97:610–648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Crain CM, Bertness MD (2005) Community impacts of a tussock sedge: is ecosystem engineering important in benign habitats? Ecology 86:2695–2704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Damblon F (1992) Paleobotanical analyses of Eriophorum and Molinia tussocks as a means of reconstructing recent history of disturbed mires in the Haute-Ardenne, Belgium. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 75:273–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. De Deyn GB, Cornelissen JHC, Bardgett RD (2008) Plant functional traits and soil carbon sequestration in constrasting biomes. Ecology Letters 11:516–531PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Elliot ET, Heil JW, Kelly EF, Monger HC (1999) Soil structural and other physical properties. In: Robertson GP, Coleman DC, Bledsoe CS, Sollins P (eds) Standard soil methods for long-term ecological research. Oxford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Eswaran H, Van den Berg E, Reich P, Kimble J (1995) Global soil carbon resources. In: Lal R, Kimble J, Levine E, Stewart BA (eds) Soils and global change. CRC Press Inc, Boca Raton, pp 27–43Google Scholar
  25. Fennessy MS, Brueske CC, Mitsch WJ (1994) Sediment deposition patterns in restored freshwater wetlands using sediment traps. Ecological Engineering 3:409–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fetcher N, Shaver GR (1982) Growth and tillering patterns within tussocks of Eriophorum vaginatum. Holarctic Ecology 5:180–186Google Scholar
  27. Fleming KS, Kaminski RM, Tietjen TE, Schummer ML, Ervin GN, Nelms KD (2012) Vegetative forage quality and moist-soil management on Wetlands Reserve Program lands in Mississippi. Wetlands 32:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Frieswyk CB, Johnston C, Zedler JB (2008) Identifying and characterizing dominant plants as an indicator of community condition. Journal of Great Lakes Research 33(Special Issue 3):125–135Google Scholar
  29. Gallagher SK (2009) Use of nitrogen and water treatments to manipulate Carex stricta Lam. propagules. M.S, University of Wisconsin-MadisonGoogle Scholar
  30. Gaudinski J, Trumbore S, Davidson E, Cook A, Markewitz D, Richter D (2001) The age of fine-root carbon in three forests of the eastern United States measured by radiocarbon. Oecologia 129:420–429Google Scholar
  31. Gibbon A, Silman M, Malhi Y, Fisher J, Meir P, Zimmermann M, Dargie G, Farfan W, Garcia K (2010) Ecosystem carbon storage across the grassland–forest transition in the high Andes of Manu National Park. Peru Ecosystems 13:1097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gleason RA, Laubhan MK, Euliss NH (2008) Ecosystem services derived from wetland conservation practices in the United States Prairie Pothole Region with an emphasis on the US Department of Agriculture Conservation Reserve and Wetlands Reserve Programs (No. 1745). US Geological SurveyGoogle Scholar
  33. Gorham E (1991) Northern peatlands: role in the carbon budget and probable responses to global warming. Ecological Applications 1:182–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hua Q, Barbetti M (2004) Review of tropospheric bomb 14C data for carbon cycle modeling and age calibration purposes. Radiocarbon 46:1273–1298Google Scholar
  35. Iannone BV, Galatowitsch SM (2008) Altering light and soil N to limit Phalaris arundinacea reinvastion in sedge meadow restorations. Resoration Ecology 16:689–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: Synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K. and Reisinger, A. (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 ppGoogle Scholar
  37. Johnson LC, Shaver GR, Giblin AE, Nadelhoffer KJ, Rastetter ER, Laundre JA, Murray GL (1996) Effects of drainage and temperature on carbon balance of tussock tundra micrososms. Oecologia 108:737–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Johnston CA, Zedler JB (2012) Identifying preferential associates to initiate restoration plantings. Restoration Ecology 20:764–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Johnston CA, Bedford BL, Bourdaghs M, Brown T, Frieswyk C, Tulbure M, Vaccaro L, Zedler JB (2007) Plant species indicators of physical environment in Great Lakes coastal wetlands. Journal of Great Lakes Research 33:106–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kivimaki SK, Yli-petays M, Tuittila E (2008) Carbon sink function of sedge and Sphagnum patches in a restored cut-away peatland: increased functional diversity leads to higher production. Journal of Applied Ecology 45:921–929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Koelbener A, Ström L, Edwards PJ, Olde Venterink H (2010) Plant species from mesotrophic wetlands cause relatively high methane emissions from peat soil. Plant and Soil 326:147–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kost M, DeSteven D (2000) Plant community responses to prescribed burning in Wisconsin sedge meadows. Natural Areas Journal 20:36–45Google Scholar
  43. Kucharik CJ, Brye KR, Norman JM, Foley JA, Gower ST, Bundy LG (2001) Measurements and modeling of carbon and nitrogen cycling in agroecosystems of southern Wisconsin: potential for SOC sequestration during the next 50 years. Ecosystems 4:237–258Google Scholar
  44. Kull A, Kull A, Jaagus J, Kuusemets V, Mander Ü (2008) The effects of fluctuating climatic conditions and weather events on nutrient dynamics in a narrow mosaic riparian peatland. Boreal Environment Research 13:243–263Google Scholar
  45. Lawrence BA (2010) Carex stricta tussock formation, persistence, and the capacity to sequester carbon. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin-MadisonGoogle Scholar
  46. Lawrence BA, Zedler JB (2011) Formation of tussocks by sedges: effects of hydroperiod and nutrients. Ecological Applications 21:1745–1759PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lawrence BA, Fahey TJ, Zedler JB (2013) Root dynamics of Carex stricta-dominated tussock meadows. Plant and Soil 364:325–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Levin I, Kromer B (2004) The tropospheric 14CO2 level in mid-latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere (1959–2003). Radiocarbon 46:1Google Scholar
  49. Lord LA (1996) Competition and dispersal in the regulation of plant species richness on Carex stricta tussocks. PhD thesis, University of New HampshireGoogle Scholar
  50. Mark AF, Fetcher N, Shaver GR, Chapin FS (1985) Estimated ages of mature tussocks of Eriophorum vaginatum along a latitudinal gradient in central Alaska, USA. Arctic and Alpine Research 17:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Matthews E, Fung I (1987) Methane emission from natural wetlands: Global distribution, area, and environmental characteristics of sources. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 1:61–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mitra S, Wassmann R, Vlek PLG (2005) An appraisal of global wetland area and its organic carbon stock. Current Science 88:25–35Google Scholar
  53. Nakamatte E, Lye KA (2007) AFLP-based differentiation in north Atlantic species of Carex sect. Phacocystis. Nordic Journal of Botany 25:318–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Olson JS (1963) Energy storage and the balance of producers and decomposers in ecological systems. Ecology 44:322–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Peach M, Zedler JB (2006) How tussocks structure sedge meadow vegetation. Wetlands 26:322–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Post WM, Kwon KC (2000) Soil carbon sequestration and land-use change: processes and potential. Global Change Biology 6:317–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. R Development Core Team (2011) A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing Vienna, Austria, http://www.R-project.org Google Scholar
  58. Raudsepp-Hearne C, Peterson GD, Bennett EM (2010) Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107:5242–5247PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Roth S, Seeger T, Poschlod P, Pfadenhauer J, Succow M (1999) Establishment of helophytes in the course of fen restoration. Applied Vegetation Science 2:131–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rubino M, Dungait JAJ, Evershed RP, Bertolini T, De Angelis P, D’Onofrio A, Lagomarsino A, Lubritto C, Merola A, Terrasi F, Cotrufo MF (2010) Carbon input belowground is the major C flux contributing to leaf litter mass loss: evidences from a 13C labelled-leaf litter experiment. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 42:1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schlesinger WH (1997) Biogeochemisty: an analysis of global change. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  62. Shaver G, Billings W (1975) Root production and root turnover in a wet tundra ecosystem, Barrow, Alaska. Ecology 56:401–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Stiles CA, Bemis B, Zedler JB (2008) Evaluating edaphic conditions favoring reed canary grass invasion in a restored native prairie. Ecological Restoration 26:61–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Trumbore SE (1993) Comparison of carbon dynamics in tropical and temperate soils using radiocarbon measurements. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 7:275–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tuittila ES, Komulainen VM, Vasander H, Laine J (1999) Restored cut-away peatland as a sink for atmospheric CO2. Oecologia 120:563–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. USDA-NRCS (2008) The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov, 19 February 2008). National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, pp 70874–74490Google Scholar
  67. van de Koppel J, Crain CM (2006) Scale-dependent inhibition drives regular tussock spacing in a freshwater marsh. The American Naturalist 168:136–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Vitt DH, Halsey LA, Bauer IE, Campbell C (2000) Spatial and temporal trends in carbon storage of peatlands of continental western Canada through the Holocene. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 37:683–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Walker S, Wilson JB, Lee WG (2003) Recovery of short tussock and woody species guilds in ungrazed Festuca novae-zelandiae short tussock grassland with fertiliser or irrigation. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 27:179–189Google Scholar
  70. Wallis E, Raulings E (2011) Relationship between water regime and hummock-building by Melaleuca ericifolia and Phragmites australis in a brackish wetland. Aquatic Botany 95:182–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Werner KJ, Zedler JB (2002) How sedge meadow soils, microtopography, and vegetation respond to sedimentation. Wetlands 22:451–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Zedler JB, Potter K (2008) Southern Wisconsin’s herbaceous wetlands: their recent history and precarious future. In: Waller D, Rooney T (eds) The vanishing present. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 193–210Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Wetland Scientists 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BotanyUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA
  2. 2.Department of ArboretumUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Environmental Science and StudiesDePaul UniversityChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations