Transcript Interaction of Invasive Plants

Interaction of Invasive Plants
with Environment and Other Biota
Eric Dibble
Bill James
Susan Wilde
A.Areas overlooked:
Lack information on how plant community shifts alter habitat
1. Need to assess habitat changes due to shifts in plant abundance,
biomass, structure, type, and diversity.
2. Need to document plant species replacement and succession after
invasive species control
3. Investigate how important habitat components impact the aquatic
community e.g. (invertebrates, fishes)
4. Most focus has been directed to impacts on sport fishes, primarily
Centrachidae. Diversify to impact on other phytophylic fishes
(especially rare and threatened species already impacted by shoreline
development, i.e. killifish, darters, and rare minnows)?
5. Much of the fish/plant research has been down in artificial systems (i.e.,
Southern reservoirs). Similar studies need to be conducted in natural
systems with natural fishes and plants.
A.Areas overlooked continued:
6. Considerable work on plant/invertebrate relationships
however, little is known on how trophic relationship among
plankton, macroinvertebrates, early life stages, and adult
fishes.
7. Need to investigate how changes in vegetated habitat
alter detritus based food chains.
8. More information is needed on the effects of invasive plant
species on the surrounding environment to address:
Are dynamics different compared to native plant
community interactions with the environment?
Do these impacts result in detrimental water quality
that can affect other trophic levels?
How are littoral-pelagic interactions affected when an
invasive species colonizes the littoral zone?
A.Areas overlooked continued:
9. Need information on how effects of management (i.e.,
mechanical, chemical, biological, and /or introduction of plants)
impact habitat components differently?
10. Need to determine the best scientific approach at addressing
these questions? (multi-scale manipulative experimentation in
ponds, mesocosms, field or laboratory).
11.Investigate whether habitats for parasites and pathogens are
plant specific.
12. Need to understand how changes in species architecture
(structure) due to epiphytes affect higher trophic levels.
13. Little is known about macrophyte invasion impacts on pelagic
community dynamics and water quality.
B. Benefit to Management:
1. Provide measurable attributes within aquatic plants important in
quantifying changes in habitat due to invasive species management
2. Provides data to assess how different plant management
strategies impact aquatic habitats and ecosystem function.
3. Provide metrics for habitat indices and/or assessment of habitat
quality in littoral zones.
4. Provide metrics to assess feasibility and cost efficiency of
management protocol.
5. Improves the communication if the factors important to
ecosystem function by providing a means of standardization of
important components in habitat.
C. Obstacles:
1. Lack of a scientific approach (i.e., study design, data collection, and
reporting data in the scientific literature) before during and after many
plant management projects.
2. Frequently management goals do not include ecological objectives.
3. Plant/environmental interactions are ecologically complex and very
difficult to study, and requires innovative scientific approaches and
methodologies.
4. Preconceived ideas of habitat and ecosystem function, and value of
plant management lead to lack of effective communication among
stake holders.
C. Obstacles continued:
5. Funding is usually targets plant control rather than fully
understanding the important of plants in the ecosystem.
6. There is a general lack of ecological knowledge by
public which makes it difficult to promote interest and
understanding to support appropriate ecological based
management.
Over coming obstacles:
1. Researchers and managers need to design scientific studies around
plant management projects to better understand changes in aquatic
habitat, water quality and other biota.
2. This collaboration could facilitate the inclusion of ecological
objectives in management efforts.
3. Assemble multidisciplinary scientist to evaluate complex
plant/environmental interactions.
4. Concrete data demonstrating habitat, fisheries, and water quality
improvement following management will lead to better communication
among stake holders.
Over coming obstacles continued:
5. Funding should be directed
toward management projects that
incorporate ecological evaluations.
6. We should target environmental
education at the local level specific
to stakeholders in our aquatic
systems. i.e. Lake Association,
Bass masters, Ducks Unlimited.
Research Priorities for
Invasive Aquatic Plants
Eric Dibble,
Bill James,
Susan Wilde