DOCSLIB.ORG

Increased Salinity and Water Depth As Constraints on Growth of Freshwater Marsh Plants

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1995 Increased Salinity and Water Depth as Constraints on Growth of Freshwater Marsh Plants. Rebecca J. Howard Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Howard, Rebecca J., "Increased Salinity and Water Depth as Constraints on Growth of Freshwater Marsh Plants." (1995). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 6107. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/6107 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zed) Road, Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 INCREASED SALINITY AND WATER DEPTH AS CONSTRAINTS ON GROWTH OF FRESHWATER MARSH PLANTS A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences by Rebecca J . Howard B.S., State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, 1976 M.S., University of Massachusetts, 1982 December 1995 UMI Number: 9618297 UMI Microform 9618297 Copyright 1996, by UMI Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many individuals have assisted in completion of the research described herein. I want to first express my gratitude to .the chairman of my committee, Dr. Irving Mendelssohn, for his invaluable guidance throughout this project. The other members of my committee, Dr s. James Grace, John Day, Jr., Robert Gambrell, and Janet Keough, also provided much-appreciated advice on research direction and constructively reviewed various manuscripts. Accurate field and greenhouse data collection and sample processing during this project would not have been possible without the assistance of several individuals. I especially want to thank John McCoy, Wayne Norling, and Libby Loggerwell for their help under often unpleasant conditions. The statistical advice and review provided by Debbie Fuller and Darron Johnson is very much appreciated. This research would not have been possible without the support of many of my colleagues in the National Biological Service (formerly U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). Special thanks are extended to Drs. Ed Pendleton and Larry Ludke for encouraging me to pursue, and Dr. Robert Stewart for supporting me throughout, this effort. All financial and logistical support was provided by the Southern Science Center, National Biological Service. I also want to acknowledge the cooperation of the National Park Service, ii Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve, in allowing access to the Barataria Preserve Unit to conduct field work. iii TABLE OT CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..................................... i i LIST OF TABLES....................................... V LIST OF FIGURES...................................... vii ABSTRACT............................................. xi CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW....... 1 CHAPTER 2. EFFECT OF INCREASED WATER DEPTH ON GROWTH OF A COMMON PERENNIAL FRESHWATER- INTERMEDIATE MARSH SPECIES IN COASTAL LOUISIANA................................ 11 CHAPTER 3. SALINITY PULSES AS CONSTRAINTS ON GROWTH OF COMMON OLIGOHALINE MARSH PLANTS OF THE NORTHERN GULF OF MEXICO. I. SPECIES VARIATION IN STRESS TOLERANCE........... 43 CHAPTER 4. SALINITY PULSES AS CONSTRAINTS ON GROWTH OF COMMON OLIGOHALINE MARSH PLANTS OF THE NORTHERN GULF OF MEXICO. II. ABILITY TO RECOVER IN FRESHWATER CONDITIONS........ 76 CHAPTER 5. SALINITY PULSE EFFECTS ON OLIGOHALINE MARSH PLANT COMMUNITY STRUCTURE AND COMPOSITION.............................. 115 CHAPTER 6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS................... 162 LITERATURE CITED..................................... 167 APPENDIX LETTER OF PERMISSION....................... 178 VITA.................................................. 180 iv LIST or TABLES 2.1 Plant response variables by water treatment.. 23 2.2 Nutrient concentration in leaf tissue........ 24 2.3 Elemental analyses of soil interstitial water (ppm) and soil-water pH, salinity (ppt), and conductivity (micromhos/cm x 104 at 25° C).... 29 3.1 Description of experimental treatments....... 49 3.2 A priori linear contrasts used in analysis of variance............................ 52 3.3 Analysis of variance of final salinity effect on plant growth ...................... 54 3.4 Analysis of variance of salinity influx rate effect on plant growth...................... 59 3.5 Plant growth response measures in salinity treatments (influx rates combined) expressed as percent of corresponding control treatment value at 3 durations of exposure............ 63 3.6 Analysis of variance with repeated measures of plant growth responses to experimental treatments over 3 months.................... 64 4.1 A priori linear contrasts used in analysis of variance..................................... 83 4.2 Aboveground tissue mortality by treatment.... 85 4.3 Analysis of variance of plant growth response to salinity pulses of various durations 86 4.4 Analysis of variance of plant tissue nutrient response to salinity pulses of various durations.................................... 92 4.5 Analysis of variance with repeated measures of plant growth response to experimental treatments over 1, 2, and 3 months.......... 100 5.1 Soil texture and organic matter (%, mean ± l SE, n«3) at collection sites for two emergent plant communities............................ 126 v 5.2 Univariate 3-way analysis of variance results for the effect of salinity pulses on aesocosm chemical characteristics at time of harvest.. 129 5.3 Community 1 univariate 3-way analysis of variance results for the effect of salinity pulses on plant growth...................... 135 5.4 community 2 univariate 3-way analysis of variance results for the effect of salinity pulses on plant growth...................... 138 5.5 Macrophyte species identified in aesocosms... 148 vi LIST OF FIGURES 2.1 Location of the Barataria Unit of Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve and experimental design...................... 15 2.2 Mean (a) and maximum (b) leaf heights over time for the 1989 and 1990 growing seasons... 26 2.3 Water depth above marsh surface at six locations along Pipeline Canal from July 1989 to July 1990................................. 27 2.4 Post-treatment mean interstitial water sulfide and ammonium-N concentrations....... 30 2.5 Post-treatment mean oxidation-reduction potential at 2- and 15-cm depths............ 31 2.6 Eh measurements over time obtained at depths of 2 cm (a) and 15 cm (b)................... 32 2.7 Interstitial water sulfide concentration over time......................................... 33 3.1 Simplified experimental design indicating one of three blocks.............................. 50 3.2 Aboveground live biomass at harvest for control (treatment 1), 6 g/L (treatments 2 and 3), and 12 g/L (treatments 4 and 5), in Eleocharls palustris, Paulcum hemitomon, Sagittaria l a n d folia, and Sclrpus americanus................................... 55 3.3 Mean stem height at harvest for control (treatment 1), 6 g/L (treatments 2 and 3)r and 12 g/L (treatments 4 and 5), in Eleocharls palustris, Panicum hemitomon, Sagittaria landfolia, and Sclrpus americanus................................... 57 3.4 Aboveground live biomass at harvest by treatment and duration of exposure in Eleocharls palustris, Panicum hemitomon, Sagittaria landfolia, and Sclrpus americanus................................... 61 3.5 Total biomass at harvest by treatment and duration of exposure in Eleocharis palustris, vii Panicum hemitomon, Sagittaria landfolia,
Recommended publications
  • Eleocharis Palustris (L.) Roem

    Eleocharis Palustris (L.) Roem

    Plant Guide COMMON SPIKERUSH Conservation Uses: This species has utility for erosion control, constructed wetland system applications, wildlife Eleocharis palustris (L.) Roem. & food and cover, wetland creation and restoration, and for Schult. increasing plant diversity in wetland and riparian Plant Symbol = ELPA3 communities. Its dense root mass makes this species an excellent choice for soil stabilization in riparian and wetland sites. The rhizomes also form a matrix for many Contributed by: USDA NRCS Idaho Plant Materials beneficial bacteria making this plant an excellent choice Program for wastewater treatment. Status Please consult the PLANTS Web site and your State Department of Natural Resources for this plant’s current status (e.g., threatened or endangered species, state noxious status, and wetland indicator values). Description General: Rush Family (Cyperaceae). Creeping spikerush is a perennial, heavily rhizomatous wetland plant that is found from low to mid elevations. It has a dense root mass that extends deeper that 40 cm (16 in) in the soil profile. The stems are singular or in small clusters and it will continue to grow to keep the heads out of the water if the water rises slowly. The stems are upright, round, and may reach 1.2 m (4 ft) in height (height is dependent on the depth of water in the growing environment). The leaves are reduced to sheaths clustered at the base of the stems. The flowers are borne in a terminal spikelet, 1 flower per scale with 2 stigmas. Plants typically flower from June through September. The seeds are yellow to brown lenticular achenes, 1.5-2.5 mm (0.06-0.1 in) long including tubercle, and subtended by up to 8 bristles (Welsh et al., 2003).
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."

    "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."

    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
  • The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts

    The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts

    The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: A County Checklist • First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Somers Bruce Sorrie and Paul Connolly, Bryan Cullina, Melissa Dow Revision • First A County Checklist Plants of Massachusetts: Vascular The A County Checklist First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program The Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP), part of the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, is one of the programs forming the Natural Heritage network. NHESP is responsible for the conservation and protection of hundreds of species that are not hunted, fished, trapped, or commercially harvested in the state. The Program's highest priority is protecting the 176 species of vertebrate and invertebrate animals and 259 species of native plants that are officially listed as Endangered, Threatened or of Special Concern in Massachusetts. Endangered species conservation in Massachusetts depends on you! A major source of funding for the protection of rare and endangered species comes from voluntary donations on state income tax forms. Contributions go to the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Fund, which provides a portion of the operating budget for the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program. NHESP protects rare species through biological inventory,
  • Vascular Flora of the Possum Walk Trail at the Infinity Science Center, Hancock County, Mississippi

    Vascular Flora of the Possum Walk Trail at the Infinity Science Center, Hancock County, Mississippi

    The University of Southern Mississippi The Aquila Digital Community Honors Theses Honors College Spring 5-2016 Vascular Flora of the Possum Walk Trail at the Infinity Science Center, Hancock County, Mississippi Hanna M. Miller University of Southern Mississippi Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/honors_theses Part of the Biodiversity Commons, and the Botany Commons Recommended Citation Miller, Hanna M., "Vascular Flora of the Possum Walk Trail at the Infinity Science Center, Hancock County, Mississippi" (2016). Honors Theses. 389. https://aquila.usm.edu/honors_theses/389 This Honors College Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors College at The Aquila Digital Community. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of The Aquila Digital Community. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The University of Southern Mississippi Vascular Flora of the Possum Walk Trail at the Infinity Science Center, Hancock County, Mississippi by Hanna Miller A Thesis Submitted to the Honors College of The University of Southern Mississippi in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in the Department of Biological Sciences May 2016 ii Approved by _________________________________ Mac H. Alford, Ph.D., Thesis Adviser Professor of Biological Sciences _________________________________ Shiao Y. Wang, Ph.D., Chair Department of Biological Sciences _________________________________ Ellen Weinauer, Ph.D., Dean Honors College iii Abstract The North American Coastal Plain contains some of the highest plant diversity in the temperate world. However, most of the region has remained unstudied, resulting in a lack of knowledge about the unique plant communities present there.
  • State of New York City's Plants 2018

    State of New York City's Plants 2018

    STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 Daniel Atha & Brian Boom © 2018 The New York Botanical Garden All rights reserved ISBN 978-0-89327-955-4 Center for Conservation Strategy The New York Botanical Garden 2900 Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY 10458 All photos NYBG staff Citation: Atha, D. and B. Boom. 2018. State of New York City’s Plants 2018. Center for Conservation Strategy. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. 132 pp. STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 INTRODUCTION 10 DOCUMENTING THE CITY’S PLANTS 10 The Flora of New York City 11 Rare Species 14 Focus on Specific Area 16 Botanical Spectacle: Summer Snow 18 CITIZEN SCIENCE 20 THREATS TO THE CITY’S PLANTS 24 NEW YORK STATE PROHIBITED AND REGULATED INVASIVE SPECIES FOUND IN NEW YORK CITY 26 LOOKING AHEAD 27 CONTRIBUTORS AND ACKNOWLEGMENTS 30 LITERATURE CITED 31 APPENDIX Checklist of the Spontaneous Vascular Plants of New York City 32 Ferns and Fern Allies 35 Gymnosperms 36 Nymphaeales and Magnoliids 37 Monocots 67 Dicots 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report, State of New York City’s Plants 2018, is the first rankings of rare, threatened, endangered, and extinct species of what is envisioned by the Center for Conservation Strategy known from New York City, and based on this compilation of The New York Botanical Garden as annual updates thirteen percent of the City’s flora is imperiled or extinct in New summarizing the status of the spontaneous plant species of the York City. five boroughs of New York City. This year’s report deals with the City’s vascular plants (ferns and fern allies, gymnosperms, We have begun the process of assessing conservation status and flowering plants), but in the future it is planned to phase in at the local level for all species.
  • Introduction to Common Native & Invasive Freshwater Plants in Alaska

    Introduction to Common Native & Invasive Freshwater Plants in Alaska

    Introduction to Common Native & Potential Invasive Freshwater Plants in Alaska Cover photographs by (top to bottom, left to right): Tara Chestnut/Hannah E. Anderson, Jamie Fenneman, Vanessa Morgan, Dana Visalli, Jamie Fenneman, Lynda K. Moore and Denny Lassuy. Introduction to Common Native & Potential Invasive Freshwater Plants in Alaska This document is based on An Aquatic Plant Identification Manual for Washington’s Freshwater Plants, which was modified with permission from the Washington State Department of Ecology, by the Center for Lakes and Reservoirs at Portland State University for Alaska Department of Fish and Game US Fish & Wildlife Service - Coastal Program US Fish & Wildlife Service - Aquatic Invasive Species Program December 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments ............................................................................ x Introduction Overview ............................................................................. xvi How to Use This Manual .................................................... xvi Categories of Special Interest Imperiled, Rare and Uncommon Aquatic Species ..................... xx Indigenous Peoples Use of Aquatic Plants .............................. xxi Invasive Aquatic Plants Impacts ................................................................................. xxi Vectors ................................................................................. xxii Prevention Tips .................................................... xxii Early Detection and Reporting
  • Eleocharis Rostellata (Torr.) Torr., Is an Obligate Wetland Graminoid Species (Reed 1988)

    Eleocharis Rostellata (Torr.) Torr., Is an Obligate Wetland Graminoid Species (Reed 1988)

    United States Department of Agriculture Conservation Assessment Forest Service Rocky of the Beaked Spikerush Mountain Region Black Hills in the Black Hills National National Forest Custer, Forest, South Dakota and South Dakota May 2003 Wyoming Bruce T. Glisson Conservation Assessment of Beaked Spikerush in the Black Hills National Forest, South Dakota and Wyoming Bruce T. Glisson, Ph.D. 315 Matterhorn Drive Park City, UT 84098 Bruce T. Glisson is a botanist and ecologist with over 10 years of consulting experience, located in Park City, Utah. He has earned a B.S. in Biology from Towson State University, an M.S. in Public Health from the University of Utah, and a Ph.D. in Botany from Brigham Young University EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Beaked spikerush, Eleocharis rostellata (Torr.) Torr., is an obligate wetland graminoid species (Reed 1988). Beaked spikerush is widespread in the Americas from across southern Canada to northern Mexico, to the West Indies, the Caribbean, and the Andes of South America (Cronquist et al. 1994; Hitchcock et al. 1994). The species is secure throughout its range with a G5 ranking, but infrequent across most of the U.S., with Region 2 state rankings ranging from S1, critically imperiled; to S2, imperiled; to SR, reported (NatureServe 2001). Beaked spikerush is a “species of special concern” with the South Dakota Natural Heritage Program (Ode pers. comm. 2001). The only currently known population of beaked spikerush in South Dakota is in Fall River County, along Cascade Creek, an area where several other rare plant species occur. The beaked spikerush population is present on lands administered by Black Hills National Forest (BHNF), and on surrounding private lands, including the Whitney Preserve owned and managed by The Nature Conservancy (TNC).
  • National Wetlands Inventory Map Report for Ridgefield NWR and Vicinity Quads: Columbia, Multnomah and Washington Counties, Orego

    National Wetlands Inventory Map Report for Ridgefield NWR and Vicinity Quads: Columbia, Multnomah and Washington Counties, Orego

    National Wetlands Inventory Map Report for Ridgefield NWR and Vicinity Quads: Columbia, Multnomah and Washington Counties, Oregon and Cowlitz and Clark Counties Washington Project ID: R01Y10P10: Ridgefield NWR Project area is restricted to portions of the following USGS 7.5 minute quadrangles: Oregon: 45122-G7 (Saint Helens) 45122-F7 (Sauvie Island) 45122-E7 (Linnton) 45122-E6 (Portland) 45122-E5 (Mount Tabor) 45122-E4 (Camas) Washington: 45122-G6 (Ridgefield) 45122-F6 (Vancouver) 45122-E3 (Washougal) Source Imagery: Citation: For all quads listed above: Citation_Information: Originator: USDA-FSA-APFO Aerial Photography Field Office Publication_Date: 2009 Publication place: Salt Lake City, Utah Title: Digital Orthoimagery Series of Washington Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: raster digital data Other_Citation_Details: 1-meter, Natural Color Citation: For all quads listed above: Citation_Information: Originator: USDA-FSA-APFO Aerial Photography Field Office Publication_Date: 2011 Publication place: Salt Lake City, Utah Title: Digital Orthoimagery Series of Oregon Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: raster digital data Other_Citation_Details: 1-meter, Natural Color Collateral Data: . USACE LiDAR vegetation survey 2009 . USGS 1:24,000 topographic quadrangles . USGS – NED – National Elevation Dataset – 3 meters resolution . USGS – NHD – National Hydrography Dataset . Soil Survey of Columbia County, Oregon . Soil Survey of Multnomah County, Oregon . Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon . Soil Survey of Clark County, Washington . Soil Survey of Cowlitz County, Washington Inventory Method: Wetland identifications were done “heads-up” in ArcMap 9.3 and ArcMap 10. Aerial photo interpretation and heads-up mapping were completed in the USFWS NWI Region 1 office in Portland, Oregon by Nicholas Jones, SWCA Environmental Consulting. QC during the mapping was provided by Chris Moller, SWCA Environmental Consulting.
  • Eleocharis Elliptica Kunth (Elliptic Spikerush): a Technical Conservation Assessment

    Eleocharis Elliptica Kunth (Elliptic Spikerush): a Technical Conservation Assessment

    Eleocharis elliptica Kunth (elliptic spikerush): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project August 10, 2006 James E. Nellessen, Ph.D. Taschek Environmental Consulting 8901 Adams St., NE, Suite D Albuquerque, NM 87113 Peer Review Administered by Center for Plant Conservation Nellessen, J.E. (2006, August 10). Eleocharis elliptica Kunth (elliptic spikerush): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/ assessments/eleochariselliptica.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Production of this assessment would not have been possible without the help of others. I wish to thank David Wunker for his help conducting Internet searches for information on Eleocharis elliptica. I wish to thank Ron Hartman for supplying photocopies of herbarium specimen labels from the University of Wyoming. Numerous other specimen labels were obtained through searches of on-line databases, so thanks go to those agencies (cited in this document) for having such convenient systems established. I would like to thank local Region 2 botanists Bonnie Heidel of the Wyoming Natural Heritage Program, and Beth Burkhart of the Black Hills National Forest for supplying information. Thanks go to Paula Nellessen for proofing the drafts of this document. Thanks go to Teresa Hurt and John Taschek of Taschek Environmental Consulting for supplying tips on style and presentation for this document. Thanks are extended to employees of the USFS Region 2, Kathy Roche and Richard Vacirca, for reviewing, supplying guidance, and making suggestions for assembling this assessment. Final thanks go to two external reviewers, one unidentified, and Dr.
  • Cyperaceae of Alberta

    Cyperaceae of Alberta

    AN ILLUSTRATED KEY TO THE CYPERACEAE OF ALBERTA Compiled and writen by Linda Kershaw and Lorna Allen April 2019 © Linda J. Kershaw & Lorna Allen This key was compiled using information primarily from and the Flora North America Association (2008), Douglas et al. (1998), and Packer and Gould (2017). Taxonomy follows VASCAN (Brouillet, 2015). The main references are listed at the end of the key. Please try the key this summer and let us know if there are ways in which it can be improved. Over the winter, we hope to add illustrations for most of the entries. The 2015 S-ranks of rare species (S1; S1S2; S2; S2S3; SU, according to ACIMS, 2015) are noted in superscript ( S1; S2;SU) after the species names. For more details go to the ACIMS web site. Similarly, exotic species are followed by a superscript X, XX if noxious and XXX if prohibited noxious (X; XX; XXX) according to the Alberta Weed Control Act (2016). CYPERACEAE SedgeFamily Key to Genera 1b 01a Flowers either ♂ or ♀; ovaries/achenes enclosed in a sac-like or scale-like structure 1a (perigynium) .....................Carex 01b Flowers with both ♂ and ♀ parts (sometimes some either ♂ or ♀); ovaries/achenes not in a perigynium .........................02 02a Spikelets somewhat fattened, with keeled scales in 2 vertical rows, grouped in ± umbrella- shaped clusters; fower bristles (perianth) 2a absent ....................... Cyperus 02b Spikelets round to cylindrical, with scales 2b spirally attached, variously arranged; fower bristles usually present . 03 03a Achenes tipped with a rounded protuberance (enlarged style-base; tubercle) . 04 03b Achenes without a tubercle (achenes 3a 3b often beaked, but without an enlarged protuberence) .......................05 04a Spikelets single; stems leafess .
  • Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi and Dark Septate Fungi in Plants Associated with Aquatic Environments Doi: 10.1590/0102-33062016Abb0296

    Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi and Dark Septate Fungi in Plants Associated with Aquatic Environments Doi: 10.1590/0102-33062016Abb0296

    Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and dark septate fungi in plants associated with aquatic environments doi: 10.1590/0102-33062016abb0296 Table S1. Presence of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) and/or dark septate fungi (DSF) in non-flowering plants and angiosperms, according to data from 62 papers. A: arbuscule; V: vesicle; H: intraradical hyphae; % COL: percentage of colonization. MYCORRHIZAL SPECIES AMF STRUCTURES % AMF COL AMF REFERENCES DSF DSF REFERENCES LYCOPODIOPHYTA1 Isoetales Isoetaceae Isoetes coromandelina L. A, V, H 43 38; 39 Isoetes echinospora Durieu A, V, H 1.9-14.5 50 + 50 Isoetes kirkii A. Braun not informed not informed 13 Isoetes lacustris L.* A, V, H 25-50 50; 61 + 50 Lycopodiales Lycopodiaceae Lycopodiella inundata (L.) Holub A, V 0-18 22 + 22 MONILOPHYTA2 Equisetales Equisetaceae Equisetum arvense L. A, V 2-28 15; 19; 52; 60 + 60 Osmundales Osmundaceae Osmunda cinnamomea L. A, V 10 14 Salviniales Marsileaceae Marsilea quadrifolia L.* V, H not informed 19;38 Salviniaceae Azolla pinnata R. Br.* not informed not informed 19 Salvinia cucullata Roxb* not informed 21 4; 19 Salvinia natans Pursh V, H not informed 38 Polipodiales Dryopteridaceae Polystichum lepidocaulon (Hook.) J. Sm. A, V not informed 30 Davalliaceae Davallia mariesii T. Moore ex Baker A not informed 30 Onocleaceae Matteuccia struthiopteris (L.) Tod. A not informed 30 Onoclea sensibilis L. A, V 10-70 14; 60 + 60 Pteridaceae Acrostichum aureum L. A, V, H 27-69 42; 55 Adiantum pedatum L. A not informed 30 Aleuritopteris argentea (S. G. Gmel) Fée A, V not informed 30 Pteris cretica L. A not informed 30 Pteris multifida Poir.
  • Vegetation Community Monitoring at Ocmulgee National Monument, 2011

    Vegetation Community Monitoring at Ocmulgee National Monument, 2011

    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Vegetation Community Monitoring at Ocmulgee National Monument, 2011 Natural Resource Data Series NPS/SECN/NRDS—2014/702 ON THE COVER Duck potato (Sagittaria latifolia) at Ocmulgee National Monument. Photograph by: Sarah C. Heath, SECN Botanist. Vegetation Community Monitoring at Ocmulgee National Monument, 2011 Natural Resource Data Series NPS/SECN/NRDS—2014/702 Sarah Corbett Heath1 Michael W. Byrne2 1USDI National Park Service Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network Cumberland Island National Seashore 101 Wheeler Street Saint Marys, Georgia 31558 2USDI National Park Service Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network 135 Phoenix Road Athens, Georgia 30605 September 2014 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Data Series is intended for the timely release of basic data sets and data summaries. Care has been taken to assure accuracy of raw data values, but a thorough analysis and interpretation of the data has not been completed. Consequently, the initial analyses of data in this report are provisional and subject to change. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.