Water, Air, and Soil Pollution

, Volume 121, Issue 1–4, pp 161–172

Vegetative Response of Sagittaria Lancifolia to Burning of Applied Crude Oil



Field studies were conducted to evaluate Sagittarialancifolia sensitivity to in-situ burning of appliedcrude oil. Twenty-four plots were constructed (2.4 × 2.4× 0.6 m) in a fresh marsh and experimental treatmentswere: 1) control (no oiling and/or burning); 2) oiling (naturalremediation); and 3) oiling plus burning. South Louisiana Crudewas applied at 2 L m-2, with a garden sprayer, on Sagittaria lancifolia stems and leaves of the oiling andoiling/burning treatment plots. Two marsh burns were conducted,one in August (Site A) and a second on separate plotsthe following April (Site B) to compare seasonal effects ofoiling and burning. Burning was initiated three days after oilapplication when the marsh was flooded to a 15–25 cm depth andwinds were calm. Live stem count, plant height growth and carbonfixation were measured up to 9 times over 52 weeks after thefirst burn (August) and 6 times over 19 weeks after the secondin-situ burn (April). Aboveground biomass was measured atthe conclusion of each study. Oil application and oil burninghad short term effects on Sagittaria lancifoliavegetation. Five to six weeks after each burn, measured Sagittaria lancifolia vegetative parameters in control, oiledand oiled/burned plots were not significantly different. Onlybiomass clipped 20 weeks after the April burn showed significanttreatment differences. Under our experimental conditions, datasuggests leaving oil to degrade and the marsh to recovernaturally may be an option to consider. Plant recovery inoiled/burned plots was as rapid as oiled plant recovery. Thissuggests burning may be a viable remediation method if a rapidresponse is needed to remove oil and control oil migration tosensitive areas.

fresh marsh in-situ burning natural cleanup oil remediation Sagittaria lancifolia 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alexander, S. K. and Webb, J. W.: 1987, 'Relationship of Spartina alterniflora Growth to Sediment Oil Content Following an Oil Spill', in Proceedings of The 1987 Oil Conference, American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D. C., pp. 455–449.Google Scholar
  2. American Petroleum Institute: 1985, 'Oil Spill Cleanup: Options forMinimizing Adverse Ecological Impacts', American Petroleum Institute, A. P. I. Publication No. 4435, Washington, D. C.Google Scholar
  3. Bragg, J. R., Prince, R. C., Harner, E. J. and Atlas, R. M.: 1994, 'Effectiveness of Bioremediation for the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill', Nature 368, 413–418.Google Scholar
  4. Dahlin. J. A., Zengel, S., Headley, C. and Michel, J.: 1998, 'Compilation and Review of Data on the Environmental Effects of In-Situ Burning of Inland and Upland Oil Spills', American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D. C.Google Scholar
  5. Davis, D.W. and Guidry, R. J.: 1996, 'Oil, Oil Spills and the States Responsibilities', Basin Research Institute Bulletin 6, 60–68.Google Scholar
  6. DeLaune, R. D., Patrick, W. H. and Bursh, R. J.: 1979, 'Effect of Crude Oil in a Louisiana Spartina alterniflora Salt Marsh', Environmental Pollution 20, 21–31.Google Scholar
  7. DeLaune, R. D., Smith, C. J. and Patrick, W. H.: 1984, 'Impact of Dispersed and Undispersed Oil Entering a Gulf of Mexico Salt Marsh', Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 3, 335–353.Google Scholar
  8. Devai, I., Delaune, R. D., Henry, C. B., Lindau, C. W. and Roberts, P. O.: 1998, 'Environmental Significance of Atmospheric Emission Resulting from In-Situ Burning of Oiled Salt Marsh', Marine Environmental Research 45, 157–167.Google Scholar
  9. DOEEIA: 1995, 'U.S. Crude Oil, Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids Reserves', 1994 Annual Report, DOEEIA-0216(94). Energy Information Administration, Office of Oil and Gas, United States Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  10. IPIECA: 1994, 'Biological Impacts of Oil Pollution: Salt Marshes', IPIECA Report Series, Volume 6, International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association, London, 20 pp.Google Scholar
  11. Kiesling, R.W., Alexander, S. K. and Webb, J.W.: 1988, 'Evaluation of Alternative Oil Spill Cleanup Techniques in a Spartina alterniflora Salt Marsh', Environmental Pollution 55, 221–238.Google Scholar
  12. Lindau, C. W., Wickersham, P., DeLaune, R. D., Collins, J., Bollich, P. K., Scott, L. M. and Lambremont, E. N.: 1998, 'Methane and Nitrous Oxide Evolution and N15 and Ra226 Uptake as Affected by Application of Gypsum and Phosphogypsum to Louisiana Rice', Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 68, 165–173.Google Scholar
  13. Louisiana Department of Natural Resources: 1996, 'Well Status Master', Louisiana Department of Natural Resources/Office of Conservation/Production Audit Division., Baton Rouge, LA.Google Scholar
  14. Mendelssohn, I. A., Hester, M.W. and Pahl, J.W.: 1995, 'Environmental Effects and Effectiveness of In-Situ Burning inWetlands: Considerations for Oil Spill Cleanup', Louisiana Oil Spill Coordinators Office, Louisiana Applied Oil Spill Research and Development Program, Baton Rouge, LA. 57 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Moir, M. E. and Erskin, B.: 1994, 'In-Situ Burning of Oil Spills on Land: A Case Study', in Proceedings, Seventeenth Arctic and Marine Oil Spill Program Technical Seminar, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, pp. 651–655.Google Scholar
  16. Pezeshki, S. R. and DeLaune, R. D.: 1993, 'Effect of Crude Oil on Gas Exchange Functions of Juncus roermerianus and Spartina alterniflora', Water Air and Soil Pollution 68, 461–468.Google Scholar
  17. Ross, S. L., Environmental Research Ltd. and Peter Devenis and Associates: 1996, 'Literature Review on In-Situ Burning of Oil in Wetlands', The In-Situ Marsh Burn Working Group, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 73 pp.Google Scholar
  18. SAS Institute: 1996, SAS System for Windows, Release 6.12, SAS Institute, Cary, NC.Google Scholar
  19. Scholten, M. C. Th. and Leedertse, P. C.: 1991, 'The Impact of Oil Pollution on Salt Marsh Vegetation', in J. Rozema and J. A. C. Verkleij (eds.), Ecological Responses to Environmental Stresses, Kluwer Publishers, The Netherlands, pp. 184–190.Google Scholar
  20. Smith, C. J., Delaune, R. D. and Patrick,W. H.: 1981, 'A Method for Determining Stress in Wetland Plant Communities Following an Oil Spill', Environmental Pollution 26, 297–304.Google Scholar
  21. Tunnell, J. W., Withers, K. and Hardegree, B.: 1997, 'Environmental Impact and Recovery of the Exxon Pipeline Oil Spill and Burn Site, Upper Copano Bay Texas: Final Report', TAMU-CC-9703-CCS, Center for Coastal Studies, Texas A & M Univ., Corpus Christi, TX, 81 pp.Google Scholar
  22. Venosa, A. D., Suidan, M. T., Wrenn, B. A., Strahmeier, K. L., Haines, J. R., King, D. and Holden, E.: 1996, 'Bioremediation of an Experimental Oil Spill on the Shoreline of Delaware Bay', Environmental Science and Technology 30, 1764–1775.Google Scholar
  23. Webb, J. W., Alexander, S. K. and Winters, J. K.: 1985, 'Effect of Autumn Application of Oil on Spartina alterniflora in a Texas Salt Marsh', Environmental Pollution 38, 321–337.Google Scholar
  24. Webb, J. W. and Aexander, S. K.: 1991, 'No. 2 Fuel Oil Effects on Spartina alterniflora in a Texas Salt Marsh', Contributions in Marine Science 32, 9–19.Google Scholar
  25. Wright, A. L., Weaver, R. W. and Webb, J. W.: 1997, 'Oil Bioremediation in Salt Marsh Mesocosms as Influenced by N and P Fertilization, Flooding and Season', Water, Air and Soil Pollution 95, 179–191.Google Scholar
  26. Zengel, S. A. and Michel, J.: 1996, 'Vegetation Cutting as a Clean-Up Method for Salt and Brackish Marshes Impacted by Oil Spills: A Review and Case History of the Effects on Plant Recovery', Marine Pollution Bulletin 32, 876–885.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Wetland Biogeochemistry Inst.Louisiana State UniversityBaton RougeUSA

Personalised recommendations