Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:49:42.722Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Nitrogen Enrichment and Competition on Growth and Spread of Giant Reed (Arundo donax)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Lauren D. Quinn ,
Michael A. Rauterkus  and
Jodie S. Holt
Lauren D. Quinn
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Sciences, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521
Michael A. Rauterkus
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Sciences, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521
Jodie S. Holt*
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Sciences, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Giant reed is an extremely aggressive riparian invader in California. Little is known about its response to nitrogen, which is often elevated in watersheds downstream from agricultural fields and wastewater treatment facilities. Two pot-experiments were conducted to quantify physiological responses of giant reed, and a co-occurring riparian species, common threesquare, to added nitrogen and to investigate a possible enhancement effect of nitrogen on the ability of giant reed to spread laterally belowground into a competitive environment. The first experiment measured shoot height, tissue biomass, and leaf area of giant reed and common threesquare, both herbaceous perennials, grown in pots with and without added nitrogen. The second experiment measured lateral rhizome growth, tissue biomass, and tiller production of giant reed in planters subjected to four possible treatments: with or without competition and with or without added nitrogen. Competition planters had previously been colonized by common threesquare and no-competition planters were unoccupied. Nitrogen-treated plants from the first experiment had greater overall shoot height. With added nitrogen, giant reed produced more root and shoot biomass, whereas common threesquare produced more rhizome and shoot biomass. In the second experiment, added nitrogen resulted in significantly greater rhizome length and greater production of tillers by giant reed regardless of competition. In competition plantings without added nitrogen, giant reed tiller production was reduced, whereas the addition of nitrogen nearly restored tiller production to levels attained without competition. Neither nitrogen nor competition significantly affected giant reed biomass production. Results of these experiments indicate the positive response of giant reed and a native riparian species to nitrogen enrichment and suggest that nitrogen can compensate for the effects of competition on giant reed in some cases. As a result, this species might be able to penetrate some environments without negative impacts from competing vegetation.

Keywords

Common threesquareScirpus americanus Pers. SCPAMgiant reed, Arundo donax L. ABKDONitrogenbiomass accumulationcompetitionclonal growthrhizome expansion
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 55 , Issue 4 , August 2007 , pp. 319 - 326
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Abissy, M. and Mandi, L. 1999. The use of rooted aquatic plants for urban wastewater treatment: Case of Arundo donax . Rev. Sci. Eau. 12:285–315.Google Scholar
Ahearn, D. S., Sheibley, R. W., Dahlgren, R. A., Anderson, M., Johnson, J., and Tate, K. W. 2005. Land use and land cover influence on water quality in the last free-flowing river draining the western Sierra Nevada, California. J. Hydrol. 313:234–247.Google Scholar
Angelini, L. G., Ceccarini, L., and Bonari, E. 2005. Biomass yield and energy balance of giant reed (Arundo donax L.) cropped in central Italy as related to different management practices. Eur. J. Agron. 22:375–389.Google Scholar
Ba, L., Wang, D. L., Hodgkinson, K. C., and Xiao, N. Z. 2006. Competitive relationships between two contrasting but coexisting grasses. Plant Ecol. 183:19–26.Google Scholar
Bailey, R. 2006. City of Riverside water quality analysis: monthly total inorganic nitrogen values for the Santa Ana River between 2002–2005 Riverside Water Quality Control Plant. Riverside, CA City of Riverside.Google Scholar
Baruch, Z. and Goldstein, G. 1999. Leaf construction cost, nutrient concentration, and net CO2 assimilation of native and invasive species in Hawaii. Oecologia. 121:183–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bell, G. P. 1997. Ecology and management of Arundo donax, and approaches to riparian habitat restoration in Southern California. Pages 103–113. in Brock, J., Wade, M., Pysek, P., Green, D. eds. Plant Invasions: Studies from North America and Europe. Leiden, Netherlands Backhuys.Google Scholar
Brooks, M. L. 2003. Effects of increased soil nitrogen on the dominance of alien annual plants in the Mojave Desert. J. Appl. Ecol. 40:344–353.Google Scholar
Burke, M. J. W. and Grime, J. P. 1996. An experimental study of plant community invasibility. Ecology. 77:776–790.Google Scholar
Bytnerowicz, A. and Fenn, M. E. 1996. Nitrogen deposition in California forests: a review. Environ. Pollut. 92:127–146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapin, F. S. 1980. The mineral–nutrition of wild plants. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 11:233–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, R. D., Gill, G. S., and Rebetzke, G. J. 2001. Identification of quantitative trait loci for traits conferring weed competitiveness in wheat (Triticum aestivum L). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 52:1235–1246.Google Scholar
Davis, M. A., Grime, J. P., and Thompson, K. 2000. Fluctuating resources in plant communities: a general theory of invasibility. J. Ecol. 88:528–534.Google Scholar
Davis, M. A. and Pelsor, M. 2001. Experimental support for a resource-based mechanistic model of invasibility. Ecol. Lett. 4:421–428.Google Scholar
de Boer, G. J. 1997. Simultaneous determination of ammonium and nitrate in soils. Pages 637–643 in Hood, T. M. and Jones, J. B. Jr. (eds). Soil and Plant Analysis in Sustainable Agriculture and Environment. Athens, GA: Micro-Macro.Google Scholar
Decamps, H. 1993. River Margins and Environmental Change. Ecol. Appl. 3:441–445.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Decruyenaere, J. G. and Holt, J. S. 2001. Seasonality of clonal propagation in giant reed. Weed Sci. 49:760–767.Google Scholar
Decruyenaere, J. G. and Holt, J. S. 2005. Ramet demography of a clonal invader, Arundo donax (Poaceae), in Southern California. Plant Soil. 277:41–52.Google Scholar
Dietz, H., Kohler, A., and Ullmann, I. 2002. Regeneration growth of the invasive clonal forb Rorippa austriaca (Brassicaceae) in relation to fertilization and interspecific competition. Plant Ecol. 158:171–182.Google Scholar
Dingkuhn, M., Johnson, D. E., Sow, A., and Audebert, A. Y. 1999. Relationships between upland rice canopy characteristics and weed competitiveness. Field Crops Res. 61:79–95.Google Scholar
Dudley, J. B. A. 1831. Arundo donax L. Pages 53–58. in Bossard, C.C., Randall, J.M., Hoshovsky, M.C., M.C. eds. Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands. Berkeley, CA University of California Press.Google Scholar
Dumas, T. L. 2000. Procedes de l'analyse organique. Annals Chemistry Physiology 247:198–213.Google Scholar
Else, J. A. 1996. Post-flood establishment of woody species and an exotic, Arundo donax, in a southern California riparian system. , San Diego, CA San Diego State University. 81.Google Scholar
Fenn, M. E., Baron, J. S., and Allen, E. B. et al. 2003. Ecological effects of nitrogen deposition in the western United States. Bioscience. 53:404–420.Google Scholar
Gregory, S. V., Swanson, F. J., McKee, W. A., and Cummins, K. W. 1991. An ecosystem perspective of riparian zones. Bioscience. 41:540–551.Google Scholar
Grotkopp, E., Rejmanek, M., and Rost, T. L. 2002. Toward a causal explanation of plant invasiveness: seedling growth and life-history strategies of 29 pine (Pinus) species. Am. Nat. 159:396–419.Google Scholar
Hickman, J., ed. 1993. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California. Berkeley, CA University of California Press.Google Scholar
Hill, D. T., Payne, V. W. E., Rogers, J. W., and Kown, S. R. 1997. Ammonia effects on the biomass production of five constructed wetland plant species. Bioresour. Technol. 62:109–113.Google Scholar
Holt, J. S. and Orcutt, D. R. 1991. Functional relationships of growth and competitiveness in perennial weeds and cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 39:575–584.Google Scholar
Hood, W. G. and Naiman, R. J. 2000. Vulnerability of riparian zones to invasion by exotic vascular plants. Plant Ecol. 148:105–114.Google Scholar
Horton, J. L. and Neufeld, H. S. 1998. Photosynthetic responses of Microstegium vimineum (Trin.) A. Camus, a shade-tolerant, C4 grass, to variable light environments. Oecologia (Berl.) 114:11–19.Google Scholar
Huenneke, L. F., Hamburg, S. P., Koide, R., Mooney, H. A., and Vitousek, P. M. 1990. Effects of soil resources on plant invasion and community structure in Californian serpentine grassland. Ecology. 71:478–491.Google Scholar
Kao, J. T., Titus, J. E., and Zhu, W. X. 2003. Differential nitrogen and phosphorus retention by five wetland plant species. Wetlands. 23:979–987.Google Scholar
Khudamrongsawat, J., Tayyar, R., and Holt, J. S. 2004. Genetic diversity of giant reed (Arundo donax) in the Santa Ana River, California. Weed Sci. 52:395–405.Google Scholar
Kleijn, D. and Van Groenendael, J. M. 1999. The exploitation of heterogeneity by a clonal plant in habitats with contrasting productivity levels. J. Ecol. 87:873–884.Google Scholar
Lambers, H., Chapin, F. S. III, and Pons, T. L. 1998. Plant Physiological Ecology. New York: Springer-Verlag. Pp. 299–313.Google Scholar
Lowe, P. N., Lauenroth, W. K., and Burke, I. C. 2003. Effects of nitrogen availability on competition between Bromus tectorum and Bouteloua gracilis . Plant Ecol. 167:247–254.Google Scholar
McJannet, C. L., Keddy, P. A., and Pick, F. R. 1995. Nitrogen and phosphorus tissue concentrations in 41 wetland plants—a comparison across habitats and functional groups. Funct. Ecol. 9:231–238.Google Scholar
Meekins, J. F. and McCarthy, B. C. 2001. Effect of environmental variation on the invasive success of a nonindigenous forest herb. Ecol. Appl. 11:1336–1348.Google Scholar
O'Dell, R. E. and Claassen, V. P. 2006. Relative performance of native and exotic grass species in response to amendment of drastically disturbed serpentine substrates. J. Appl. Ecol. 43:898–908.Google Scholar
Padgett, P. E. and Allen, E. B. 1999. Differential responses to nitrogen fertilization in native shrubs and exotic annuals common to Mediterranean coastal sage scrub of California. Plant Ecol. 144:93–101.Google Scholar
Padgett, P. E., Allen, E. B., Bytnerowicz, A., and Minich, R. A. 1999. Changes in soil inorganic nitrogen as related to atmospheric nitrogenous pollutants in southern California. Atmos. Environ. 33:769–781.Google Scholar
Pennings, S. C., Clark, C. M., Cleland, E. E., Collins, S. L., Gough, L., Gross, K. L., Milchunas, D. G., and Suding, K. N. 2005. Do individual plant species show predictable responses to nitrogen addition across multiple experiments? Oikos. 110:547–555.Google Scholar
Perdue, R. E. 1958. Arundo donax: source of musical reeds and industrial cellulose. Econ. Bot. 12:368–404.Google Scholar
Peterjohn, W. T. and Correll, D. L. 1984. Nutrient dynamics in an agricultural watershed—observations on the role of a riparian forest. Ecology. 65:1466–1475.Google Scholar
PlantyTabacchi, A. M., Tabacchi, E., Naiman, R. J., Deferrari, C., and Decamps, H. 1996. Invasibility of species rich communities in riparian zones. Conserv. Biol. 10:598–607.Google Scholar
Quinn, L. D. 2006. Ecological correlates of invasion by Arundo donax . Riverside, CA Department of Botany and Plant Sciences, University of California.Google Scholar
Radosevich, S. R., Ghersa, C. M., and Holt, J. S. 1997. Weed Ecology. Implications for Management. New York, NY John Wiley & Sons. 163–207.Google Scholar
Reynolds, H. L. and D'Antonio, C. 1996. The ecological significance of plasticity in root weight ratio in response to nitrogen: opinion. Plant and Soil 185:75–97.Google Scholar
Rickey, M. A. and Anderson, R. C. 2004. Effects of nitrogen addition on the invasive grass Phragmites australis and a native competitor Spartina pectinata . J. Appl. Ecol. 41:888–896.Google Scholar
Rossa, B., Tuffers, A. V., Naidoo, G., and von Willert, D. J. 1998. Arundo donax L. (Poaceae)—a C3 species with unusually high photosynthetic capacity. Bot. Acta. 111:216–221.Google Scholar
Schwinning, S., Starr, B. I., Wojcik, N. J., Miller, M. E., Ehleringer, J. E., and Sanford, R. L. 2005. Effects of nitrogen deposition on an arid grassland in the Colorado plateau cold desert. Range. Ecol. Manag. 58:565–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sher, A. A., Marshall, D. L., and Taylor, J. P. 2002. Establishment patterns of native Populus and Salix in the presence of invasive nonnative Tamarix . Ecol. Appl. 12:760–772.Google Scholar
Sher, A. A., Spencer, D., Sweet, S., and Ditomaso, J. 2003. Compensatory growth response across two nutrient regimes by invasive Arundo donax . Abstracts of the Ecological Society of America Annual Meeting. 88:306. [Abstract].Google Scholar
Spencer, D. F., Ksander, G. G., and Whitehand, L. C. 2005. Spatial and temporal variation in RGR and leaf quality of a clonal riparian plant: Arundo donax . Aquat. Bot. 81:27–36.Google Scholar
Stohlgren, T. J., Bull, K. A., Otsuki, Y., Villa, C. A., and Lee, M. 1998. Riparian zones as havens for exotic plant species in the central grasslands. Plant Ecol. 138:113–125.Google Scholar
[USGS] U.S. Geological Survey 2006. USGS Water-Data Site Information for the Nation. http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/si.Google Scholar
Vitousek, P. M., Aber, J. D., Howarth, R. W., Likens, G. E., Matson, P. A., Schindler, D. W., Schlesinger, W. H., and Tilman, D. G. 1997. Human alteration of the global nitrogen cycle: sources and consequences. Ecol. Appl. 7:737–750.Google Scholar
Wedin, D. A. and Tilman, D. 1990. Species effects on nitrogen cycling—a test with perennial grasses. Oecologia. 84:433–441.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wicks, G. A., Nordquist, P. T., Baenziger, P. S., Klein, R. N., Hammons, R. H., and Watkins, J. E. 2004. Winter wheat cultivar characteristics affect annual weed suppression. Weed Technol. 18:988–998.Google Scholar
Wilson, A. M., Harris, G. A., and Gates, D. H. 1966. Fertilization of mixed cheatgrass–bluebunch wheatgrass stands. J. Range Manag. 19:134–137.Google Scholar
Wilson, S. D. and Gerry, A. K. 1995. Strategies for mixed-grass prairie restoration: herbicide, tilling, and nitrogen manipulation. Restor. Ecol. 3:290–298.Google Scholar