Skip to main content
Log in

Succession and productivity on perturbed and naturalSpartina salt-marsh areas in New Jersey

  • Published:
Estuaries Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Vegetation growth on spoil placed on aSpartina patens andS. alterniflora marsh in Barnegat Bay, New Jersey, was examined for two years following spoil deposition. In areas where spoil was leveled to match the elevation of the marsh, the percent cover by the end of the first growing season ranged from 60 to 90%. By the second year, cover was 100% in all study plots. Even during the first year, there was no difference in species diversity or vegetation species in the experimental and control areas. The percentage of shrubs did not increase on the perturbed (spoil) areas compared to the control plots. During the first year, but not the second, live and dead biomass was greater in the perturbed areas compared to the control plots. In an area where the spoil was thicker succession was exceedingly slow and there was only about 5% grass cover by the end of the first growing season. BecauseSpartina colonizes primarily by rhizome growth, the comparatively slow recovery was attributed to the inability of the grass to penetrate the thick spoil layer.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Adams, D. A. 1963. Factors influencing vascular plant zonation in North Carolina salt marshes.Ecology 44:445–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourn, W. S., andC. Cottam. 1939. The effect of lowering water levels on marsh wildlife.Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Conf. 4:343–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourn, W. S., and C. Cottam. 1950. Some biological effects of ditching tidewater marshes. Res. Report 19, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

  • Burger, J., andJ. Shisler. 1978. The effects of ditching a salt marsh on colony and nest site selection by Herring Gulls (Larus argentatus).Am. Midl. Nat. 100:54–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darnell, R. M. 1964. Organic detritus in relation to secondary production in aquatic communities.Verh. Intern. Verein. Limnol. 15:462–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrigno, F., andD. M. Jobbins. 1968. Open marsh management.Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 55: 104–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrigno, F., andD. M. Jobbins. 1975. Salt marsh water management for mosquito control.Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 62:30–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keefe, C. W. 1972. Marsh production: a summary of the literature.Contrib. Mar. Sci. 16:163–181.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, J. B. 1934. A salt marsh study.Am. J. Sci. 28:161–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landers, J. F., A. S. Johnson, P. H. Morgan, andW. P. Baldwin. 1976. Duck foods in managed tidal impoundments in South Carolina.J. Wildl. Manage. 40:721–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendelssohn, I. A., andK. L. Marcellus. 1976. Angiosperm production of three Virginia marshes in various salinity and soil nutrient regimes.Chesapeake Sci. 17:15–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, W. R., andF. E. Egler. 1950. Vegetation of the Wequetequock-Pawcatuck tide marshes, Connecticut.Ecol. Monogr. 20:143–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odum, E. P. 1961. The role of tidal marshes in estuarine production.N.Y. State Conserv. 15:12–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odum, E. P. 1970. Utilization of the direct grazing and plant detritus food chains of the striped mulletMugil cephalus, p. 222–240.In J.H. Steele (ed.), Marine Food Chains.

  • Provost, K. W. 1977. Tidal datum planes circumscribing salt marshes.Bull. Mar. Sci. 26:558–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redfield, A. C. 1972. Development of a New England salt marsh.Ecol. Monogr. 42:201–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romig, R. F. 1973. Growth and reproduction ofSpartina, Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Delaware.

  • Shanholtzer, G. F. 1974 Relationship of vertebrates to salt marsh plants, p. 463–476.In R. J. Reimold and W. H. Queen (eds.), Ecology of Halophytes. Academic Press, Inc., New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shisler, J., andD. M. Jobbins. 1977. Salt marsh productivity as affected by the selective ditching technique, open marsh water management.Mosq. News, 37:631–636.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shisler, J., F. H. Lesser, andT. L. Schultze. 1975. Re-evaluation of some effects of water management on the Mispillion Marsh, Kent County, Delaware.Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 66:276–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shisler, J., T. L. Schultze, andB. L. Howes. 1978. The effect of the marsh elder (Iva frutescens) on the standing crop biomass ofSpartina patens and associated wildlife.Biol. Conserv. 14:159–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. B. 1907. The New Jersey salt marsh and its improvement. Bull. N.J. Agr. Exp. Ext. Stat. No. 207, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valiela, I., andJ. M. Teal. 1974. Nutrient limitation in salt marsh vegetation, p. 547–563.In R. J. Reidmold and W. H. Queen (eds.), Ecology of Halophytes. Academic Press, Inc., New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zar, J. H. 1974. Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Burger, J., Shisler, J. Succession and productivity on perturbed and naturalSpartina salt-marsh areas in New Jersey. Estuaries 6, 50–56 (1983). https://doi.org/10.2307/1351806

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1351806

Keywords

Navigation