Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Restoring forest in wetlands dominated by reed canarygrass: The effects of pre-planting treatments on early survival of planted stock

  • Published:
Wetlands Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) is an aggressive and persistent invasive species in formerly forested wetlands of the northern United States. Heavy shading reduces the dominance of reed canarygrass, so a promising long-term approach to restoration of reed canarygrass-dominated wetlands is the establishment of woody plants that will overtop and shade the grass. The first step toward developing this long-term restoration method is to determine a combination of reed canarygrass control methods and suitable trees and shrubs to provide high early survival of the native woody plants. We tested 23 tree and shrub species in five treatments to determine: 1) the woody species that have the highest survival when planted in treated stands of reed canarygrass, and 2) the pre-planting treatments that lead to the highest rates of survival. Near-monocultures of reed canarygrass were herbicided, mowed and herbicided, herbicided and plowed, or herbicided and burned. One-to three-year-old, mostly bare-rooted trees and shrubs were hand-planted into these treatments and into untreated control plots at three sites, and over two growing seasons. Fall herbicide followed by spring plowing provided the highest survival for the majority of species planted. However, all experimental treatments (controlling reed canarygrass with a single herbicide application) provided reasonably high survival of the 10 most successful woody species. Those pre-planting treatments and study sites that developed the greatest herbaceous species diversity after treatment had the highest tree and shrub survival. The early establishment success we found using these methods is encouraging for development of a technique for restoring swamp forest in degraded reed canarygrass-dominated wetlands.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Alway, F. J. 1931. Early trials and use of reed canary grass as a forage plant. Journal of the American Society of Agronomy 23: 64–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, D. E. 1961. Taxonomy and distribution of the genus Phalaris. Iowa State Journal of Science 36: 1–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apfelbaum, S. I. and C. E. Sams. 1987. Ecology and control of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.). Natural Areas Journal 7: 69–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, W. J. 1999. The rapid growth of a population of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) and its impact on some riverbottom herbs. Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society 126: 133–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battaglia, L. L., P. R. Minchin, and D. W. Pritchett. 2002. Sixteen years of old-field succession and reestablishment of a bottomland hardwood forest in the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley. Wetlands 22: 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berkowitz, A. R., C. D. Canham, and V. R. Kelly. 1995. Competition vs. facilitation of tree seedling growth and survival in early successional communities. Ecology 76: 1156–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, C. A. and L. J. Chapman. 1999. Forest restoration in abandoned agricultural land: a case study from East Africa. Conservation Biology 13: 1301–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clewel, A. F. and R. Lea. 1989. Creation and restoration of forested wetland vegetation in the southeastern United States. Environmental Protection Agency, Corvallis, OR, USA. EPA/ 600/3-89/038.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conner, W. H. 1995. Woody plant regeneration in 3 South Carolina Taxodium/Nyssa stands following Hurricane Hugo. Ecological Engineering 4: 277–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Antonio, C. M. and P. M. Vitousek. 1992. Biological invasions by exotic grasses, the grass fire cycle, and global change. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 23: 63–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daubenmire, R. F. 1959. A canopy-coverage method. Northwest Science 33: 43–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, R. W. and G. P. Quinn. 1989. Comparisons of treatments after an analysis of variance in ecology. Ecological Monographs 59: 433–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, R. D. and P. R. Wetzel. 2005. Invading monotypic stands of Phalaris arundinacea: a test of fire, herbicide, and woody and herbaceous native plant groups. Restoration Ecology 13: 318–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galatowitsch, S. M., N. O. Anderson, and P. D. Ascher. 1999. Invasiveness in wetland plants in temperate North America. Wetlands 19: 733–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gifford, A. L. S., J. B. Ferdy, and J. Molofsky. 2002. Genetic composition and morphological variation among populations of the invasive grass, Phalaris arundinacea. Canadian Journal of Botany 80: 779–85.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gleason, H. A. and A. Cronquist. 1991. Manual of Vascular Plants of Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada, second edition. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, D. H. and A. T. Leiser. 1982. Biotechnical Slope Protection and Erosion Control. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, Inc., New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, E. K. and S. M. Galatowitsch. 2001. Differences in wetland plant community establishment with additions of nitrate-N and invasive species (Phalaris arundinacea and Typha x glauca). Canadian Journal of Botany 79: 170–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groninger, J. W. 2005. Increasing the impact of bottomland hardwood afforestation. Journal of Forestry 103: 184–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groninger, J. W., W. W. Aust, M. Miwa, and J. A. Stanturf. 2000. Growth predictions for tree species planted on marginal soybean lands in the Lower Mississippi Valley. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 55: 91–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guariguata, M. R., R. Rheingans, and F. Montagnini. 1995. Early woody invasion under tree plantations in Costa Rica: implications for forest restoration. Restoration Ecology 3: 252–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hapner, J. A. and J. A. Reinartz. 2005. Vegetation of the Ulao Swamp, a disturbed hardwood-conifer swamp in southeastern Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Field Station Bulletin 31: 1–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, R. A. 1991. Reed canary grass poses threat to oak savanna restoration and maintenance (Wisconsin). Restoration and Management Notes 9: 32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hess, S. C., P. C. Banko, G. J. Brenner, and J. D. Jacobi. 1999. Factors related to the recovery of subalpine woodland on Mauna Kea, Hawaii. Biotropica 31: 212–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, J. D., C. D. Canham, and D. M. Wood. 1995. Patterns and causes of resistance to tree invasion in rights-of-way. Ecological Applications 5: 459–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hovick, S. M. 2005. Restoring forest in wetlands dominated by reed canary grass: the effects of pre-planting treatments on early survival. M.S. Thesis. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, H. F. 1995. Succession and fire season in experimental prairie plantings. Ecology 76: 1917–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchison, M. 1992. Vegetation management guideline — Reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.). Natural Areas Journal 12: 159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, N. L. and S. Kotz. 1969. Distributions in Statistics: Discrete Distributions. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kephart, K. D., D. R. Buxton, and S. E. Taylor. 1992. Growth of C3 and C4 perennial grasses under reduced irradiance. Crop Science 32: 1033–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilbride, K. M. and F. L. Paveglio. 1999. Integrated pest management to control reed canarygrass in seasonal wetlands of southwestern Washington. Wildlife Society Bulletin 27: 292–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruse, B. S. and J. W. Groninger. 2003. Vegetative characteristics of recently reforested bottomlands in the lower Cache River Watershed, Illinois, USA. Restoration Ecology 11: 273–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavergne, S. and J. Molofsky. 2004. Reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) as a biological model in the study of plant invasions. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 23: 415–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesica, P. 1997. Spread of Phalaris arundinacea adversely impacts the endangered plant Howellia aquatilis. Great Basin Naturalist 57: 366–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindig-Cisneros, R. and J. B. Zedler. 2002a. Phalaris arundinacea seedling establishment: Effects of canopy complexity in fen, mesocosm, and restoration experiments. Canadian Journal of Botany 80: 617–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindig-Cisneros, R. and J. B. Zedler. 2002b. Relationships between canopy complexity and germination microsites for Phalaris arundinacea L. Oecologia 133: 159–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mack, R. N., D. Simberloff, W. M. Lonsdale, H. Evans, M. Clout, and F. A. Bazzazz. 2000. Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecological Applications 10: 689–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazia, C. N., E. J. Chaneton, C. M. Ghersa, and R. J. C. Leon. 2001. Limits to tree species invasion in pampean grassland and forest plant communities. Oecologia 128: 594–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLeod, K. W., M. R. Reed, and E. A. Nelson. 2001. Influence of a willow canopy on tree seedling establishment for wetland restoration. Wetlands 21: 395–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merigliano, M. F. and P. Lesica. 1998. The native status of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) in the inland Northwest, USA. Natural Areas Journal 18: 223–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch, W. J. and J. G. Gosselink. 1993. Wetlands, second edition. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, S. L. and J. Molofsky. 1998. Effects of genotypes, soil moisture, and competition on the growth of an invasive grass, Phalaris arundinacea (reed canary grass). Canadian Journal of Botany 76: 1939–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, S. L. and J. Molofsky. 1999. Environmental and genetic effects on the early survival and growth of the invasive grass Phalaris arundinacea. Canadian Journal of Botany 77: 1447–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulhouse, J. M. and S. M. Galatowitsch. 2003. Revegetation of prairie pothole wetlands in the mid-continental US: twelve years post-reflooding. Plant Ecology 169: 143–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council, Committee on Mitigating Wetland Losses. 2001. Compensating for wetland losses under the Clean Water Act. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paine, L. K. and C. A. Ribic. 2002. Comparison of riparian plant communities under four land management systems in south-western Wisconsin. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 92: 93–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, D. E., D. C. Kurer, and J. A. Steingraeber. 1970. Soil Survey, Ozaukee County, Wisconsin. USDA Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, L. G. and S. M. Galatowitsch. 2003. A test of two annual cover crops for controlling Phalaris arundinacea invasion in restored sedge meadow wetlands. Restoration Ecology 11: 297–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, L. G. and S. M. Galatowitsch. 2004. The influence of light availability on competition between Phalaris arundinacea and a native wetland sedge. Plant Ecology 170: 73–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, L. G., S. M. Galatowitsch, and C. J. Rosen. 2004. Competitive control of invasive vegetation: a native wetland sedge suppresses Phalaris arundinacea in carbon-enriched soil. Journal of Applied Ecology 41: 151–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pimentel, D., L. Lach, R. Zuniga, and D. Morrison. 2000. Environmental and economic costs of nonindigenous species in the United States. Bioscience 50: 53–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randall, J. M. and B. A. Rice. 2003. 1998–1999 Survey of Invasive Species on Lands Managed by The Nature Conservancy. http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/survey.html. Updated January 2003.

  • Reed, P. B. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: national summary. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Biological Report 88(24). 244 pp.

  • Rooney, T. P., S. L. Solheim, and D. M. Waller. 2002. Factors affecting the regeneration of northern white cedar in lowland forests of the Upper Great Lakes region, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 163: 119–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahramaa, M., H. Ihamaki, and L. Jauhiainen. 2003. Variation in biomass related variables of reed canary grass. Agricultural and Food Science in Finland 12: 213–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmude, K. O. 1971. Soil Survey, Washington County, Wisconsin. USDA Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal, R. R. and F. J. Rohlf. 1995. Biometry, third edition. W. H. Freeman and Company, New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • SPSS. 2004. SPSS for Windows. SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spyreas, G., J. Ellis, C. Carroll, and B. Molano-Flores. 2004. Non-native plant commonness and dominance in the forests, wetlands, and grasslands of Illinois, USA. Natural Areas Journal 24: 290–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • SYSTAT. 2002. SYSTAT for Windows. SYSTAT Software, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, A. L. 1995. Factors affecting the distribution and abundance of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) M.S. Thesis. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tu, M. 2004. Options for reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) control and management in the Pacific Northwest. http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/moredocs/phaaru01.pdf. Accessed March 30, 2005. Updated June 7, 2004.

  • Urbanska, K. M. 1997. Safe sites—interface of plant population ecology and restoration ecology. p. 81–110. In K. M. Urbanska, N. R. Webb, and P. J. Edwards (eds.) Restoration Ecology and Sustainable Development. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, K. L. 1965. Shrub-carrs of southeastern Wisconsin. Ecology 46: 286–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcove, D. S., D. Rothstein, J. Dubow, A. Phillips, and E. Losos. 1998. Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. Bioscience 48: 607–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkins, F. S. and H. D. Hughes. 1932. Agronomic trials with reed canary grass. Journal of the American Society of Agronomy 24: 18–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zedler, J. B. and S. Kercher. 2004. Causes and consequences of invasive plants in wetlands: opportunities, opportunists, and outcomes. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 23: 431–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Stephen M. Hovick

    Present address: Department of Plant Biology, University of Georgia, 30602, Athens, Georgia, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Field Station, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 3095 Blue Goose Road, 53080, Saukville, Wisconsin, USA

    Stephen M. Hovick & James A. Reinartz

Authors
  1. Stephen M. Hovick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James A. Reinartz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hovick, S.M., Reinartz, J.A. Restoring forest in wetlands dominated by reed canarygrass: The effects of pre-planting treatments on early survival of planted stock. Wetlands 27, 24–39 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1672/0277-5212(2007)27[24:RFIWDB]2.0.CO;2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1672/0277-5212(2007)27[24:RFIWDB]2.0.CO;2

Key Words

Search

Navigation