DOCSLIB.ORG

The Aquatic Plants of Central Utah and Their Distribution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Aquatic Plants of Central Utah and Their Distribution Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 1960-05-01 The aquatic plants of central Utah and their distribution Gerald E. Bessey Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Bessey, Gerald E., "The aquatic plants of central Utah and their distribution" (1960). Theses and Dissertations. 8019. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/8019 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. THI AQUATICPLANTS OF CDTRALUTAH A.NDTHEIR DISTRIBUTION A Thesis Presented to the Department of Botany Brigham Young Universit7 In Partial Fulfillment or the Requirement tor the Degree Master or Science by Gerald E. Besse7 llay 1960 Thia thesis, by Qeral.4 E. Bessey, is accepted in its present torm by the ~partment ot Botany ot Brighaa Young University as satisf"7ing the thesis requirement tor the degree of laster ot Science. 'fype(I b7 Gerald B. Besse7 Acknowledgments The writer is indebted to a number et persons who have contributed to the success of the project. Sincere gratitude is expressed to Dr. Bertrand F. Harrison tor his encouragement, his technical advise, and for bis critical reading of the manuscript. Thanks are turther due him tor his identification ot the grasses. Dr. Lynn Hayward has g1ven en- couragement. and assistance in reading and evaluating the manuscript. Mont E. Lewis i4entified most collections or the Cyperaceae tor which thanks are expressed. Identification of the mosses was completed by Dr. Seville Flowers. Success in obtaining data from a number ot the lake and pond stations was made easier by the aid ot Gordon Sage who accompanied the writer into the field ~t,o help ri th the boat and in recording data. Sincere thanks are due Dr. Wilmer Tanner, Dr. Earl Christensen, for making some identi- fication, Dr. Glen Moore, and Dr. Kent McKnight tor their interest and general encouragement. The Utah County map used in the thesis was compiled and con- tributed by James Bee. Finally, to my rife, to whomthe thesis is dedicated, love and regard are expressed tor the patience shown and encouragement given throughout the field work and writing ot' the manuscript. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEIGEMENTS• • • • • • . • • . • • • • . ii LIST OF TABLES. • • • • • . • • . iv LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS • • • • • • • • • .• • • • • • • • • • 0 vii. Chapter I. INTRODUCTION•••••••••••••eooeooo 1 II. IIETHOOOAND MATERIALS • • • • • • . 9 III. RESULTS. • • • • 0 14 IV. DISCUSSION. 73 v. SUMIIUY • • • • • • • . 84 REFERENCES• • • • • • • . • • • • 0 . • • 85 ABSTRACT•• . 0 • • • 0 • • • • . O O O 0 86 LIST OF TABLES Table Page l. Location of Study Stations • ·• • • • • , • • • • • • • • • • • • 1.3 2. Physical and Chemical F~atures, Station 1 . 2.3 3. Distribution of Vegetation., Station 1 •• • • . • • • 23 4. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 2 • • • • • • • • • • 24 Distribution of Vegetation, Station 2 •• • • • • . • • • 24 6. Physical and Chemical Features, Station .3 •••••••••• 25 7. Distribution of Vegetation, Station .3 •••••••••••• 25 s. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 4 • • • • • • • • • • • • 26 9. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 4 •••••••••• 27 10. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 5 • • • • • • • • • • 28 11. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 5 ••• • • . ••••• 28 12. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 5 •••••••••• 28 13. Distribution of Vegetation., Station 5 •• • • • • • • • • . 29 14. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 6 • • • • • • • • . 29 15. Distribution of Vegetation., Station 6 •••••••• . 29 16. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 6 • • • • • • • • • • .30 17. Distribution of Vegetation., Station 6 •• • • . .. • • • 18. !>hysical and Chemical Features, Station 7 •••••••••• .31 19. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 7 •• • • • . • • • • • • .31 20. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 8 . • • • • • • • • • .32 21. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 8 • • • • • • • • • • . • .32 22. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 9 . • • • • • • . • • 3.3 23. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 9 • • • • • • • • • . • • .3.3 Physical and Chemical. Features, Station 10 ••• • • • • • • • 34 25. l)istribution of Vegetation, Station 10 • • • • • .34 I • • • • • • • iv LIST OF TABLF.S-Gontinued Table Page 26. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 11. • • • • • • • 35 27. Distribution or Vegetation, Station 11. • • • • • • • • • 35 28. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 12 • • • • • • • • 36 29. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 12 • • • • • • • • • • ;36 ;30. Physical and Chen,.ical Features, Station 13. • • • • • • • 37 31. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 13 • • • • • • • • • • 37 .32. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 1.3 • • • • • • • • .38 33. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 13. • • • • • • • • • JS 34. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 14. • • • • • • • • • 38 .35. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 14 • • • • • • • • 39 36. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 15 • • • • • • • • 39 37. Distribution ot Vegetation, Station 15. • • • • • • • • • 39 JS. Peysical and Chemical Features, Station 16 •••••• • • 40 .39. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 16 • • • • • • • • • • 40 40. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 17 •••••••• 41 41. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 17 •••••••••• 41 42. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 18 • • • • • • • • 42 43. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 18 ••• • • • • • • • 42 Physical and Chemical Features, Station 19 • • • • • • • • 43 4;. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 19 •••• , ••••• 43 46. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 20 • • • • • • • • 44 47. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 20 • • • • • • • • • • 44 48. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 21 • • • • • • • • 41+ 49. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 22 •••••• • • 45 50. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 22 • • • • • • • • • • 45 V LIST OF TABLES-Continued Table Page 51. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 23 • • • • • • • • • 46 520 Distribution of Vegetation, Station 23 ••••• • • • • • • 46 53. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 24 • • • • • • . 47 54. Distribution or Vegetation, Station 24 •• • • • . • 47 55. Distribution or Vegetation, Station 25 • • • • • • . • . • 48 56. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 25 • • • • . • • . 49 57. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 26 •• . • 0 • 0 0 50 58. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 26 • • • • • • . 50 59. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 27 ••••••••• 51 60. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 27 ••••••••••• 51 61. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 28 ••••••••• 52 62. J)istribution or Vegetation, Station 28 • • . • • • . • 0 52 63. Physical and Chemical Features, Station 29 ••••••••• 53 Distribution of Vegetation, Station 29 ••••• • • . •• 53 Physical and Chel!lical Features, Station 30 •• 0 e • • e • 0 54 66. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 30 • •••••••••• 54 67. Physical and Chemical. Features, Station 31 • • • • • • ••• 55 68. Distribution of Vegetation, Station .31 •• ·• •• • • • 0 • • 55 69. Physical and Chemical Features, Station .32 • • • • • • • • • 56 70. Distribution of Vegetation, Station 32 • • • • . • • • • • 56 71. Physical and Chemical Features, Station .33. • • . ••• 57 72. Distribution or Vegetation, Station 33 •• • • • • • •••• 57 Range of Water Characteristics Associated with Aquatic Species and Their Greatest Abundance •••••••• . .. 58 74. Sample Presence of Aquatic Plant Species and Their Distribution by Station ••••••••••••••••• 60 vi L~STOF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1. Map of Utah County Showing Location of Study Stations • • • 12 2. Plot of Jordan Oxbow Pond Showing Location of Transect • • 24 .3. Plot of Jordan River Station Showing Location ot Transect • 25 4. Plot of American Fork River Station Showing Location ot Transect • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . o • • • • • • • • 25 5. Plot or Artesian Karsh Showing Location or Transect • • • • 27 6. Plot or Utah Lake., Station 5, Showing Location of Transect. 27 7. Plot of Utah Lake Spring Showing Location or Transects • • .30 8. Plot of Salamander Lake Showing Location ot Transect • • 0 31 Plot of Riverside Pond Showing Location of Transect. • • • .32 10. Plot or Lehi Slough Showing Location of Transect •• • • • 33 11. Plot of West Lehi Pond Showing Location or Transect • • • • 34 12. Plot of Slough, Station 11, Showing Location of Transect • 35 13. Plot or MeadowMarsh Showing Location of Transect • • 0 • • 36 14. Plot of Provo River, Station 1.3, Showing Location of Transects • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .38 15. Plot or Provo River, Station 14, Showing Location of Transect • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • e O O 0 39 16. Plot or Pothole, Station 15, Showing Location or Transect • .39 17. Plot of Slough, Station 16, Showing Location or Transect 40 18. Plot or Farm Pond Showing Location of Transect • • • • • • 41 19. Plot or Big Dry Creek Station Showing Location of Transect 42 20. Plot of Utah Lake, Station 19, Showing Location of Transects 43 21. Plot or Mud Lake Showing Location of Transect ••• 0 0 0 0 44 22. Plot of Station 21 Showing Location of Transect and Distribution or Vegetation • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 44 23. Plot of Provo River, Station 22, Showing Location of transect •••••••••• ••••••• 0 0 0 0 • 45 vii
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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
    [Show full text]
  • Cyperaceae of Puerto Rico. Arturo Gonzalez-Mas Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1964 Cyperaceae of Puerto Rico. Arturo Gonzalez-mas Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Gonzalez-mas, Arturo, "Cyperaceae of Puerto Rico." (1964). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 912. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/912 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]. This dissertation has been 64—8802 microfilmed exactly as received GONZALEZ—MAS, Arturo, 1923- CYPERACEAE OF PUERTO RICO. Louisiana State University, Ph.D., 1964 B o ta n y University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan CYPERACEAE OF PUERTO RICO A Dissertation I' 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 Botany and Plant Pathology by Arturo Gonzalez-Mas B.S., University of Puerto Rico, 1945 M.S., North Carolina State College, 1952 January, 1964 PLEASE NOTE: Not original copy. Small and unreadable print on some maps. Filmed as received. UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS, INC. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author wishes to express his sincere gratitude to Dr. Clair A. Brown for his interest, guidance, and encouragement during the course of this investigation and for his helpful criticism in the preparation of the manuscript and illustrations.
    [Show full text]
  • Floristic Quality Assessment Report
    FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT IN INDIANA: THE CONCEPT, USE, AND DEVELOPMENT OF COEFFICIENTS OF CONSERVATISM Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) the State tree of Indiana June 2004 Final Report for ARN A305-4-53 EPA Wetland Program Development Grant CD975586-01 Prepared by: Paul E. Rothrock, Ph.D. Taylor University Upland, IN 46989-1001 Introduction Since the early nineteenth century the Indiana landscape has undergone a massive transformation (Jackson 1997). In the pre-settlement period, Indiana was an almost unbroken blanket of forests, prairies, and wetlands. Much of the land was cleared, plowed, or drained for lumber, the raising of crops, and a range of urban and industrial activities. Indiana’s native biota is now restricted to relatively small and often isolated tracts across the State. This fragmentation and reduction of the State’s biological diversity has challenged Hoosiers to look carefully at how to monitor further changes within our remnant natural communities and how to effectively conserve and even restore many of these valuable places within our State. To meet this monitoring, conservation, and restoration challenge, one needs to develop a variety of appropriate analytical tools. Ideally these techniques should be simple to learn and apply, give consistent results between different observers, and be repeatable. Floristic Assessment, which includes metrics such as the Floristic Quality Index (FQI) and Mean C values, has gained wide acceptance among environmental scientists and decision-makers, land stewards, and restoration ecologists in Indiana’s neighboring states and regions: Illinois (Taft et al. 1997), Michigan (Herman et al. 1996), Missouri (Ladd 1996), and Wisconsin (Bernthal 2003) as well as northern Ohio (Andreas 1993) and southern Ontario (Oldham et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Phytoremediation of Heavy Metal-Polluted Mine Drainage by Eleocharis Acicularis
    Phytoremediation of Heavy Metal-Polluted Mine Drainage by Eleocharis acicularis Nurfitri AG1*, Masayuki S1,2 and Koichiro S3 1Department of Earth Science, Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Ehime University, Matsuyama 7908577, Japan 2Faculty of Collaborative Regional Innovation, Ehime University, 2-5 Bunkyo-Cho, Matsuyama 7908577, Japan 3Cyclotron Research Center, Iwate Medical University, 348-58 Tomegamori, Takizawa, Iwate 0200173, Japan *Corresponding author: Nurfitri AG, Department of Earth Science, Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Ehime University, 2-5 Bunkyo-Cho, Matsuyama 7908577, Japan, Tel: +818062870755; E-mail: [email protected] Received: February 16, 2017; Accepted: February 27, 2017; Published: February 28, 2017 Abstract The aquatic macrophyte Eleocharis acicularis from Cyperaceae family have been reported to be a hyperaccumulator of heavy metals such as As, Fe, Ag, Cd, Cs, Cu, In, Pb, and Zn in laboratories and field experiments. This study aimed to determine heavy metal accumulation in E. acicularis at heavy metal-rich mine drainage and to reveal the plant ability to uptake heavy metals in waste drainage with addition of silicon fertilizer in E. acicularis for phytoremediation. The floating mats of E. acicularis were transplanted in the two of mining wastewater pond in a mining site of Southwest Japan. The result indicates that the bioconcentration factors of Fe, Cu, Zn, As, and Pb shows the E. acicularis is a hyperaccumulator of heavy metals in the water. However, there are no effects on the addition of silicon fertilizer in correlations between silicon concentration and heavy metal in E. acicularis. Keywords: Eleocharis acicularis; Phytoremediation; Silicon fertilizer Introduction Soil and underground water contamination by heavy metals is a serious problem worldwide, and ongoing studies in several countries are addressing these environmental issues [1,2].
    [Show full text]
  • The C4 Plant Lineages of Planet Earth
    Journal of Experimental Botany, Vol. 62, No. 9, pp. 3155–3169, 2011 doi:10.1093/jxb/err048 Advance Access publication 16 March, 2011 REVIEW PAPER The C4 plant lineages of planet Earth Rowan F. Sage1,*, Pascal-Antoine Christin2 and Erika J. Edwards2 1 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, The University of Toronto, 25 Willcocks Street, Toronto, Ontario M5S3B2 Canada 2 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Brown University, 80 Waterman St., Providence, RI 02912, USA * To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: [email protected] Received 30 November 2010; Revised 1 February 2011; Accepted 2 February 2011 Abstract Using isotopic screens, phylogenetic assessments, and 45 years of physiological data, it is now possible to identify most of the evolutionary lineages expressing the C4 photosynthetic pathway. Here, 62 recognizable lineages of C4 photosynthesis are listed. Thirty-six lineages (60%) occur in the eudicots. Monocots account for 26 lineages, with a Downloaded from minimum of 18 lineages being present in the grass family and six in the sedge family. Species exhibiting the C3–C4 intermediate type of photosynthesis correspond to 21 lineages. Of these, 9 are not immediately associated with any C4 lineage, indicating that they did not share common C3–C4 ancestors with C4 species and are instead an independent line. The geographic centre of origin for 47 of the lineages could be estimated. These centres tend to jxb.oxfordjournals.org cluster in areas corresponding to what are now arid to semi-arid regions of southwestern North America, south- central South America, central Asia, northeastern and southern Africa, and inland Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • 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 .
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Note 38: Description, Propagation, and Establishment of Wetland-Riparian Grass and Grass-Like Species Of
    TECHNICAL NOTE USDA - Natural Resources Conservation Service Boise, Idaho – Salt Lake City, Utah TN PLANT MATERIALS NO. 38 OCTOBER 2011 REVISION DESCRIPTION, PROPAGATION, AND ESTABLISHMENT OF WETLAND - RIPARIAN GRASS AND GRASS-LIKE SPECIES IN THE INTERMOUNTAIN WEST J. Chris Hoag, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho (Ret.) Derek Tilley, Agronomist, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho Dan Ogle, Plant Materials Specialist, NRCS, Boise, Idaho Loren St. John, PMC Team Leader, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho A healthy wetland system with a diverse plant community. Photo by Derek Tilley This technical note describes propagation protocols and establishment methods and considerations for wetland and riparian area creation and enhancement. It provides species descriptions for several wetland grass and grass-like species commonly used in the Intermountain West. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 5 DEFINING RIPARIAN ZONES 5 WETLAND INDICATOR CATEGORIES 8 DIRECT SEEDING 9 Seeding Grasses 9 Seeding Grass-like Wetland Species 10 Hydroseeding 10 TRANSPLANTS 11 Green House Plant Production 11 Wildings 12 Rhizomes 12 Wetland Sod 13 WETLAND TRANSPLANT ESTABLISHMENT 13 WATER MANIPULATION 14 SUMMARY 15 PLANT DATASHEETS 17 NATIVE SPECIES Beckmannia syzigachne American Sloughgrass 18 Calamagrostis canadensis Bluejoint Reedgrass 20 Carex aquatilis Water Sedge 22 Carex nebrascensis Nebraska Sedge 24 Deschampsia cespitosa Tufted Hairgrass 26 Distichlis spicata Inland Saltgrass 29 Eleocharis palustris Creeping Spikerush 31 Glyceria elata Mannagrass 33 Juncus balticus Baltic Rush 35 Schoenoplectus acutus Hardstem Bulrush 38 Schoenoplectus maritimus Cosmopolitan Bulrush 40 Schoenoplectus pungens Threesquare Bulrush 42 Spartina pectinata Prairie Cordgrass 44 Typha latifolia Cattail 46 3 INTRODUCED SPECIES Agrostis gigantea Redtop 48 Alopecurus arundinaceus Creeping Foxtail 51 Elymus hoffmanii RS Hybrid Wheatgrass 54 Phleum pretense Timothy 57 Thinopyrum ponticum Tall Wheatgrass 60 APPENDIX Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Waterton Lakes National Park • Common Name(Order Family Genus Species)
    Waterton Lakes National Park Flora • Common Name(Order Family Genus species) Monocotyledons • Arrow-grass, Marsh (Najadales Juncaginaceae Triglochin palustris) • Arrow-grass, Seaside (Najadales Juncaginaceae Triglochin maritima) • Arrowhead, Northern (Alismatales Alismataceae Sagittaria cuneata) • Asphodel, Sticky False (Liliales Liliaceae Triantha glutinosa) • Barley, Foxtail (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Hordeum jubatum) • Bear-grass (Liliales Liliaceae Xerophyllum tenax) • Bentgrass, Alpine (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Podagrostis humilis) • Bentgrass, Creeping (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Agrostis stolonifera) • Bentgrass, Green (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Calamagrostis stricta) • Bentgrass, Spike (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Agrostis exarata) • Bluegrass, Alpine (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa alpina) • Bluegrass, Annual (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa annua) • Bluegrass, Arctic (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa arctica) • Bluegrass, Plains (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa arida) • Bluegrass, Bulbous (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa bulbosa) • Bluegrass, Canada (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa compressa) • Bluegrass, Cusick's (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa cusickii) • Bluegrass, Fendler's (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa fendleriana) • Bluegrass, Glaucous (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa glauca) • Bluegrass, Inland (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa interior) • Bluegrass, Fowl (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa palustris) • Bluegrass, Patterson's (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa pattersonii) • Bluegrass, Kentucky (Poales Poaceae/Gramineae Poa pratensis) • Bluegrass, Sandberg's (Poales
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Dissolved Silicon on the Removal of Heavy Metals
    water Article Effect of Dissolved Silicon on the Removal of Heavy Metals from Aqueous Solution by Aquatic Macrophyte Eleocharis acicularis Ha T.H. Nguyen 1,* , Masayuki Sakakibara 2, Minh N. Nguyen 1, Nhuan T. Mai 1 and Vinh T. Nguyen 3 1 VNU University of Science, Vietnam National University, 334 Nguyen Trai, Ha Noi 10053, Vietnam; [email protected] (M.N.N.); [email protected] (N.T.M.) 2 Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Ehime University, Matsuyama 790-8577, Japan; [email protected] 3 Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), PO Box 123, Broadway, Sydney, NSW 2007, Australia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] or [email protected]; Tel.: +84-243-558-7060 Received: 5 April 2019; Accepted: 2 May 2019; Published: 4 May 2019 Abstract: Silicon (Si) has been recently reconsidered as a beneficial element due to its direct roles in stimulating the growth of many plant species and alleviating metal toxicity. This study aimed at validating the potential of an aquatic macrophyte Eleocharis acicularis for simultaneous removal of heavy metals from aqueous solutions under different dissolved Si. The laboratory experiments designed for determining the removal efficiencies of heavy metals were conducted in the absence or presence of Si on a time scale up to 21 days. Eleocharis acicularis was transplanted into the solutions 1 containing 0.5 mg L− of indium (In), gallium (Ga), silver (Ag), thallium (Tl), copper (Cu), zinc 1 (Zn), cadmium (Cd), and lead (Pb) with various Si concentrations from 0 to 4.0 mg L− .
    [Show full text]
  • Eleocharis Compressa) Sullivant
    Conservation Assessment for Flatstem Spike-Rush (Eleocharis compressa) Sullivant USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region April 2003 Deb Le Blanc 2727 N. Lincoln Rd. Escanaba, MI 49829 906-786-4062 This Conservation Assessment was prepared to compile the published and unpublished information on the subject species or community. It does not represent a management decision by the U.S. Forest Service. Though the best scientific information available was used and subject experts were consulted in preparation of this document, it is expected that new information will arise. In the spirit of continuous learning and adaptive management, if the reader has information that will assist in conserving the subject taxon, please contact the Eastern Region of the Forest Service Threatened and Endangered Species Program at 10 Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203. Conservation Assessment for Flatstem Spike-Rush (Eleocharis compressa) Sullivant 2 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION/ OBJECTIVES............................................................. 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................... 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................... 5 NOMENCLATURE AND TAXONOMY .................................................. 6 DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES .................................................................... 7 LIFE HISTORY............................................................................................ 9 HABITAT ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bent Spike-Rush Eleocharis Geniculata
    COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Bent Spike-rush Eleocharis geniculata Great Lakes Plains population Southern Mountain population in Canada ENDANGERED 2009 COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC. 2009. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Bent Spike-rush Eleocharis geniculata, Great Lakes Plains population and Southern Mountain population, in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vii + 30 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm). Production note: COSEWIC acknowledges Terry McIntosh, Michael J. Oldham, and Curtis Björk for writing the status report on the Bent Spike-rush (Eleocharis geniculata) in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment Canada, overseen and edited by Erich Haber, Co-chair, COSEWIC Vascular Plants Specialist Subcommittee. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: 819-953-3215 Fax: 819-994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur l’éléocharide géniculée (Eleocharis geniculata), population des plaines des Grands Lacs et population des montagnes du Sud, au Canada. Cover photo: Bent Spike-rush — Photograph by T. McIntosh. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2009. Catalogue No. CW69-14/581-2009E-PDF ISBN 978-1-100-12947-1 Recycled paper COSEWIC Assessment Summary Assessment Summary – April 2009 Common name Bent Spike-rush - Great Lakes Plains population Scientific name Eleocharis geniculata Status Endangered Reason for designation Only two extant Ontario populations are known for this annual species of the sedge family.
    [Show full text]
  • El Género Eleocharis R. Br. (Cyperaceae) Para Venezuela, Taxonomía Y Fitogeografía
    UNIVERSIDAD CENTRAL DE VENEZUELA FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS POSTGRADO EN BOTÁNICA El género Eleocharis R. Br. (Cyperaceae) para Venezuela, Taxonomía y Fitogeografía Tesis Doctoral presentada ante la ilustre Universidad Central de Venezuela por la Lic. Irene Carolina Fedón Chacón, para optar al título de Doctor en Ciencias, mención Botánica. Tutoras: Dra. Marcia Escala. Dra. Omaira Hokche. Caracas – Venezuela Julio 2018. UNIVERSIDAD CENTRAL DE VENEZUELA FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS INSTITUTO DE BIOLOGIA EXPERIMENTAL POSTGRADO EN BOTÁNICA Tesis Doctoral “El género Eleocharis R. Br. (Cyperaceae) para Venezuela, Taxonomía y Fitogeografía” Julio 2018 Presentado por Lic. Irene Carolina Fedón Chacón . 2 Eleocharis en Venezuela RESUMEN El género Eleocharis R. Br., está conformado por hierbas de tallo fotosintético, hojas simples reducidas a solo la vaina, e inflorescencia tipo espiguilla terminal. El género pertenece a la familia Cyperaceae (430 ssp), la tercera en importancia para el país, por el número de especies dentro de las monocotiledóneas, precedida por Orchidacedae (1632 ssp) y Poaceae (755 ssp). Los Eleocharis cuentan con 258 especies en el mundo y 40 para Venezuela, siendo de amplia distribución geográfica dentro del territorio nacional. Este género está circunscrito dentro de la Tribu Scirpeae y a partir de 2010 se incluyó en la Tribu Eleocharideae, denotando que sus características taxonómicas conforman su principal dificultad al momento de identificar a las especies, pues debe estar en etapa reproductiva para completar los caracteres morfológicos distintivos. El objetivo de la presente investigación es establecer relaciones sistemáticas, aclarar la circunscripción infragenérica, facilitar herramientas para definir taxonómicamente a las especies del género Eleocharis en Venezuela, aportar información fitogeográfica, morfológica, anatómica y sistemática de sus taxa.
    [Show full text]