SpringerLink
Log in

Invasive Plants of Great Salt Lake Wetlands: What, Where, When, How, and Why?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Great Salt Lake Biology

Abstract

Great Salt Lake (GSL) and its wetlands are recognized around the world for the valuable habitat they provide for millions of migratory birds. GSL wetlands are threatened by a number of invasive plants, the most problematic of which is non-native phragmites (Phragmites australis) although there are a number of other species that are concerning and also a target of management. In this chapter, we describe the major invasive plants of and their distributions across GSL wetlands, detail the mechanisms driving these plant invasions and their historical context, discuss why different invasive species present unwanted impacts, and synthesize best practices for invasive plant control for these species in GSL wetlands. Managers of GSL wetlands face a daunting task to control these plants, particularly in the case of phragmites, where hundreds of hectares of infestations must be treated and retreated annually. Eradication of phragmites will not be possible given its intense propagule pressure and dense seed banks, thus strategic and prioritized management approaches are critical. Future success for all invaders will be contingent upon continued cooperation between scientists and managers to develop robust treatment techniques and between managers to coordinate their management to reduce invader cover and impacts. Furthermore, future research and management priorities should include (1) limiting invader propagule pressure and seed bank densities, (2) optimizing native plant revegetation following invader removal, (3) early detection and control of new invaders that are likely to increase with climate change, (4) more refined hydrologic management to promote invader control, and (5) quantitative documentation of avian impacts from invaders, especially given the continental importance of this habitat to migratory birds. Despite the threats GSL and its wetlands face with anthropogenic development, water diversions, and climate change, we are optimistic that at least in the case of invasive species, collaborative and science-backed management can continue to be effective given current partnerships and practices.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams CR, Galatowitsch SM (2006) Increasing the effectiveness of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) control in wet meadow restorations. Restor Ecol 14:441–451

    Google Scholar 

  • Albert A, Brisson J, Belzile F, Turgeon J, Lavoie C (2015) Strategies for a successful plant invasion: the reproduction of Phragmites australis in north-eastern North America. J Ecol 103:1529–1537

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich TW, Paul DS (2002) Avian ecology of Great Salt Lake. In: Gwynn JW (ed) Great Salt Lake: an overview of change. Utah Department of Natural Resources and Utah Geological Survey Special Publication, Salt Lake City, pp 343–374

    Google Scholar 

  • Alminagorta O, Rosenberg DE, Kettenring KM (2016) Systems modeling to improve the hydro-ecological performance of diked wetlands. Water Resour Res 52:7070–7085

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin AH, Kettenring KM, Whigham DF (2010) Seed banks of Phragmites australis-dominated brackish wetlands: relationships to seed viability, inundation, and land cover. Aquat Bot 93:163–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Barber B, Cavitt J (2012) Dietary review for aquatic birds utilizing Willard Spur, Great Salt Lake. Final Report, Utah Division of Water Quality, Salt Lake City, UT

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett-Lennard EG, Norman HC, Dixon K (2016) Improving saltland revegetation through understanding the “recruitment niche”: potential lessons for ecological restoration in extreme environments. Restor Ecol 24:S91–S97

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellrose FC (1980) Ducks, geese and swans of North America. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, PA

    Google Scholar 

  • Belzile F, Labbé J, LeBlanc MC, Lavoie C (2010) Seeds contribute strongly to the spread of the invasive genotype of the common reed (Phragmites australis). Biol Invasions 12:2243–2250

    Google Scholar 

  • Benoit LK, Askins RA (1999) Impact of the spread of Phragmites on the distribution of birds in Connecticut tidal marshes. Wetlands 19:194–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Bioeconomics, Inc (2012) Economic significance of the Great Salt Lake to the State of Utah. Missoula, MT. https://documents.deq.utah.gov/water-quality/standards-technical-services/great-salt-lake-advisory-council/Activities/DWQ-2012-006864.pdf. Accessed 8 Apr 2019

  • Blank RR, Qualls RG, Young JA (2002) Lepidium latifolium: plant nutrient competition-soil interactions. Biol Fertil Soils 35:458–464

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bohnen JL, Galatowitsch SM (2005) Spring peeper meadow: revegetation practices in a seasonal wetland restoration in Minnesota. Ecol Restor 23:172–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Brisson J, de Blois S, Lavoie C (2010) Roadside as invasion pathway for common reed (Phragmites australis). Invasive Plant Sci Manag 3:506–514

    Google Scholar 

  • Brudvig LA, Barak RS, Bauer JT, Caughlin TT, Laughlin DC, Larios L, Matthews JW, Stuble KL, Turley NE, Zirbel CR (2017) Interpreting variation to advance predictive restoration science. J Appl Ecol 54:1018–1027

    Google Scholar 

  • Brusati E, DiTomaso J (2005) Potamogeton crispus plant assessment form Cal-IPC Inventory. https://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/paf/potamogeton-crispus-plant-assessment-form/

  • Burr SW, Scott D (2004) Application of the recreational specialization framework to understanding visitors to the Great Salt Lake Bird Festival. Event Manag 9:27–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Byun C, de Blois S, Brisson J (2013) Plant functional group identity and diversity determine biotic resistance to invasion by an exotic grass. J Ecol 101:128–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Byun C, de Blois S, Brisson J (2015) Interactions between abiotic constraint, propagule pressure, and biotic resistance regulate plant invasion. Oecologia 178:285–296

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cao L, Berent L, Fusaro A (2020) Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv. In: U.S. Geological Survey Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database, Gainesville, FL, and NOAA Great Lakes Aquatic Nonindigenous Species Information System, Ann Arbor, MI. https://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/GreatLakes/FactSheet.aspx?SpeciesID=2664

  • Cavitt JF, Jones SL, Wilson NM, Dieni JS, Zimmerman TS, Doster RH, Howe WH (2014) Atlas of breeding colonial waterbirds in the interior western United States. Final Report, US Department of the Interior, Fish & Wildlife Service, Denver, CO

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers RM, Meyerson LA, Saltonstall K (1999) Expansion of Phragmites australis into tidal wetlands of North America. Aquat Bot 64:261–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers RM, Havens KJ, Killeen S, Berman M (2008) Common reed Phragmites australis occurrence and adjacent land use along estuarine shoreline in Chesapeake Bay. Wetlands 28:1097

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox RR, Kadlec JA (1995) Dynamics of potential waterfowl foods in Great Salt Lake marshes during summer. Wetlands 15:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Cranney CR (2016) Control of large stands of Phragmites australis in Great Salt Lake, Utah wetlands. Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/4988

  • Cronk JK, Fennessy MS (2001) Wetland plants: biology and ecology. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl TE, Dick J, Swords J, Wilen BO (2015) Data collection requirements and procedures for map** wetland, deepwater and related habitats of the United States. USFWS Division of Habitat and Resource Conservation, National Standards and Support Team, Madison, WI, 92p

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis MA, Grime JP, Thompson K (2000) Fluctuating resources in plant communities: a general theory of invasibility. J Ecol 88:528–534

    Google Scholar 

  • Derr JF (2008) Common reed (Phragmites australis) response to mowing and herbicide application. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 1:12–16

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • DiTomaso JM, Kyser GB, Oneto SR, Wilson RG, Orloff SB, Anderson LW, Wright SD, Roncoroni JA, Miller TL, Prather TS, Ransom C, Beck KG, Duncan C, Wilson KA, Mann JJ (2013) Weed control in natural areas in the western United States. Weed Research and Information Center, University of California

    Google Scholar 

  • Downard R, Endter-Wada J (2013) Kee** wetlands wet in the western United States: adaptations to drought in agriculture-dominated human-natural systems. J Environ Manag 131:394–406

    Google Scholar 

  • Downard R, Endter-Wada J, Kettenring KM (2014) Adaptive wetland management in an uncertain and changing arid environment. Ecol Soc 19:23

    Google Scholar 

  • Downard R, Frank M, Perkins J, Kettenring K, Larese-Casanova M (2017) Wetland plants of Great Salt Lake, a guide to identification, communities, and bird habitat. Current Publications. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/extension_curall/1761

  • Duffield J, Neher C, Patterson D (2011) Utah waterfowl hunting: 2011 hunter survey: hunter attitudes and economic benefits. Bioeconomics, Missoula, MT

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan BL (2019) Impacts of cattle grazing as a tool to control Phragmites australis in wetlands on nitrogen, phosphorus, and carbon. Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/7420

  • Duncan BL, Hansen R, Cranney C, Shah JJF, Veblen KE, Kettenring KM (2019) Cattle grazing for invasive Phragmites australis (common reed) management in Northern Utah wetlands. All Current Publications. Paper 2030. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/extension_curall/2030

  • England DM (2019) Seeding treatments to enhance seedling performance of the bulrushes Bolboschoenus maritimus, Schoenoplectus acutus and S. americanus in wetland restorations. All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 7659. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/7659/

  • Esser LL (1994) Echinochloa crus-galli. In: Fire Effects Information System. https://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/graminoid/echcru/all.html

  • Evans MEK, Dennehy JJ (2005) Germ banking: bet-hedging and variable release from egg and seed dormancy. Q R Biol 80:431–451

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans KE, Martinson W (2008) Utah’s featured birds and viewing sites: a conservation platform for IBAs and BHCAs. Sun Litho, Salt Lake City, UT

    Google Scholar 

  • Executive Presidential Order (1999) Executive Order 13112 of February 3, 1999: invasive species. Fed Regist 64:6183–6186

    Google Scholar 

  • Fire Effects Information System (2019). https://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/lytsal/all.html

  • Fraser LH, Karnezis JP (2005) A comparative assessment of seedling survival and biomass accumulation for fourteen wetland plant species grown under minor water-depth differences. Wetlands 25:520–530

    Google Scholar 

  • Galatowitsch SM, van der Valk AG (1994) Restoring prairie wetlands: an ecological approach. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA

    Google Scholar 

  • Galatowitsch SM, Anderson NO, Ascher PD (1999) Invasiveness in wetland plants in temperate North America. Wetlands 19:733–755

    Google Scholar 

  • Gioria M, Pyšek P (2017) Early bird catches the worm: germination as a critical step in plant invasion. Biol Invasions 19:1055–1080

    Google Scholar 

  • Gleason RA, Tangen BA, Laubhan MK, Lor S (2012) A multi-refuge study to evaluate the effectiveness of growing-season and dormant-season burns to control cattail. US Geological Survey, Reston, VA. https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2012/5143/sir2012-5143.pdf

  • Goman M, Wells L (2000) Trends in river flow affecting the northeastern reach of the San Francisco Bay Estuary over the past 7000 years. Quat Res 54:206–217

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Great Salt Lake Bird Festival (2019) http://www.daviscountyutah.gov/greatsaltlakebirdfest. Accessed 19 May 2019

  • Great Salt Lake Planning Team (2000) Great Salt Lake comprehensive management plan and descision document. Utah Department of Natural Resources, Salt Lake City, UT

    Google Scholar 

  • Grubb PJ (1977) The maintenance of species-richness in plant communities: the importance of the regeneration niche. Biol Rev 52:107–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen RM (1978) Shasta ground sloth food habits, Rampart Cave, Arizona. Paleobiology 4:302–319

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynes RR, Hellquist CB (2000) Potamogeton crispus in Flora of North America @ eflorasorg. Flora N Am Editor Comm Eds Flora N Am North Mex 20 Vols N Y Oxf Vol 22. http://www.efloras.org/florataxonaspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=200024690. Accessed 6 Apr 2019

  • Hazelton ELG, Mozdzer TJ, Burdick DM, Kettenring KM, Whigham DF (2014) Phragmites australis management in the United States: 40 years of methods and outcomes. AoB Plants 6. https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/plu001

  • Holmgren NH (2005) In: Holmgren NH, Holmgren PK, Cronquist A (eds) Frankeniaceae, volume two, Part B: Subclass Dilleniidae. Botanical Garden, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudon C, Gagnon P, Jean M (2005) Hydrological factors controlling the spread of common reed (Phragmites australis) in the St Lawrence River (Québec, Canada). Écoscience 12:347–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurd EG, Shaw NL (1992) Seed technology for Carex and Juncus species of the Intermountain Region. In: Intermountain Nurseryman Association annual meeting. USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Park City, UT, pp 74–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Intermountain Region Herbarium Network (2019) http://intermountainbiota.org/portal/index.php. Accessed 3 Mar 2019

  • Intermountain West Joint Venture (2013) Implementation plan: strengthening science and partnerships. Missoula, MT

    Google Scholar 

  • James JJ, Svejcar TJ, Rinella MJ (2011) Demographic processes limiting seedling recruitment in arid grassland restoration. J Appl Ecol 48:961–969

    Google Scholar 

  • Jodoin Y, Lavoie C, Villeneuve P, Theriault M, Beaulieu J, Belzile F (2008) Highways as corridors and habitats for the invasive common reed Phragmites australis in Quebec, Canada. J Appl Ecol 45:459–466

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller BEM (2000) Genetic variation among and within populations of Phragmites australis in the Charles River watershed. Aquat Bot 66:195–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Kessler AC, Merchant JW, Allen CR, Shultz SD (2011) Impacts of invasive plants on sandhill crane (Grus canadensis) roosting habitat. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 4:369–377

    Google Scholar 

  • Kettenring KM (2016) Viability, dormancy, germination, and intraspecific variation of Bolboschoenus maritimus (alkali bulrush) seeds. Aquat Bot 134:26–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Kettenring KM, Galatowitsch SM (2011) Carex seedling emergence in restored and natural prairie wetlands. Wetlands 31:273–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Kettenring KM, Mock KE (2012) Genetic diversity, reproductive mode, and dispersal differ between the cryptic invader, Phragmites australis, and its native conspecific. Biol Invasions 14:2489–2504

    Google Scholar 

  • Kettenring KM, Whigham DF (2018) The role of propagule type, resource availability, and seed source in Phragmites invasion in Chesapeake Bay wetlands. Wetlands 38:1259–1268

    Google Scholar 

  • Kettenring KM, McCormick MK, Baron HM, Whigham DF (2011) Mechanisms of Phragmites australis invasion: feedbacks among genetic diversity, nutrients, and sexual reproduction. J Appl Ecol 48:1305–1313

    Google Scholar 

  • Kettenring KM, de Blois S, Hauber DP (2012) Moving from a regional to a continental perspective of Phragmites australis invasion in North America. AoB Plants 2012. https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/pls040

  • Kettenring KM, Whigham DF, Hazelton ELG, Gallagher SK, Weiner HM (2015) Biotic resistance, disturbance, and mode of colonization impact the invasion of a widespread, introduced wetland grass. Ecol Appl 25:466–480

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kettenring KM, Mock KE, Zaman B, McKee M (2016) Life on the edge: reproductive mode and rate of invasive Phragmites australis patch expansion. Biol Invasions 18:2475–2495

    Google Scholar 

  • Kettenring KM, Menuz DR, Mock KE (2019) The nativity and distribution of the cryptic invader Phalaris arundinacea (reed canarygrass) in riparian areas of the Columbia and Missouri River Basins. Wetlands 39:55–66

    Google Scholar 

  • King RS, Deluca WV, Whigham DF, Marra PP (2007) Threshold effects of coastal urbanization on Phragmites australis (common reed) abundance and foliar nitrogen in Chesapeake Bay. Estuar Coasts 30:469–481

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kiviat E, Hamilton E (2001) Phragmites use by native North Americans. Aquat Bot 69:341–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulmatiski A, Beard KH, Meyerson LA, Gibson JR, Mock KE (2011) Nonnative Phragmites australis invasion into Utah wetlands. West North Am Nat 70:541–552

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert AM, Saltonstall K, Long R, Dudley TL (2016) Biogeography of Phragmites australis lineages in the southwestern United States. Biol Invasions 18:2597–2617

    Google Scholar 

  • Li E, Endter-Wada J, Li S (2019) Dynamics of Utah’s agricultural landscapes in response to urbanization: a comparison between irrigated and non-irrigated agricultural lands. Appl Geogr 105:58–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Lishawa SC, Lawrence BA, Albert DA, Tuchman NC (2015) Biomass harvest of invasive Typha promotes plant diversity in a Great Lakes coastal wetland. Restor Ecol 23:228–237

    Google Scholar 

  • Long AL, Kettenring KM, Hawkins CP, Neale CMU (2017a) Distribution and drivers of a widespread, invasive wetland grass, Phragmites australis, in wetlands of the Great Salt Lake, Utah, USA. Wetlands 37:45–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Long AL, Kettenring KM, Toth R (2017b) Prioritizing management of the invasive grass common reed (Phragmites australis) in Great Salt Lake wetlands. Invasions Plant Sci Manag 10:155–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Low G, Downard R (2018) Great Salt Lake Wetlands Water Quality Standards Workshops, 25

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowry BJ, Ransom C, Whitesides R, Olsen H (2017) Noxious weed field guide for Utah. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2351&context=extension_curall

  • Marty JE, Kettenring KM (2017) Seed dormancy break and germination for restoration of three globally important wetland bulrushes. Ecol Restor 35:138–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews JW, Molano-Flores B, Ellis J, Marcum PB, Handel W, Zylka J, Phillippe LR (2017) Impacts of management and antecedent site condition on restoration outcomes in a sand prairie. Restor Ecol 25:972–981

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick MK, Kettenring KM, Baron HM, Whigham DF (2010a) Extent and reproductive mechanisms of Phragmites australis spread in brackish wetlands in Chesapeake Bay, Maryland (USA). Wetlands 30:67–74

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick MK, Kettenring KM, Baron HM, Whigham DF (2010b) Spread of invasive Phragmites australis in estuaries with differing degrees of development: genetic patterns, Allee effects and interpretation. J Ecol 98:1369–1378

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick MK, Brooks HEA, Whigham DF (2016) Microsatellite analysis to estimate realized dispersal distance in Phragmites australis. Biol Invasions 18:2497–2504

    Google Scholar 

  • Meadows RE, Saltonstall K (2007) Distribution of native and introduced Phragmites australis in freshwater and oligohaline tidal marshes of the Delmarva peninsula and southern New Jersey. J Torrey Bot Soc 134:99–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Menuz D, McCoy-Sulentic M (2019) Bear River watershed wetland assessment and landscape analysis: Salt Lake City, Utah Geological Survey contract deliverable for the US Environmental Protection Agency Wetland Program Development Grant #CD96851201

    Google Scholar 

  • Menuz D, Sempler R (2018) Jordan River watershed wetland assessment and landscape analysis: Salt Lake City, Utah Geological Survey contract deliverable for the US Environmental Protection Agency Wetland Program Development Grant #CD96804801

    Google Scholar 

  • Menuz D, Sempler R, Jones J (2014) Great Salt Lake wetland condition assessment: Salt Lake City, Utah Geological Survey contract deliverable for the US Environmental Protection Agency Wetland Program Development Grant #CD96811101

    Google Scholar 

  • Menuz D, Sempler R, Jones J (2016) Weber River watershed wetland condition assessment: Salt Lake City, Utah Geological Survey contract deliverable for the US Environmental Protection Agency Wetland Program Development Grant #CD96812601-0

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson LA, Cronin JT (2013) Evidence for multiple introductions of Phragmites australis to North America: detection of a new non-native haplotype. Biol Invasions 15:2605–2608

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson LA, Saltonstall K, Windham L, Kiviat E, Findlay S (2000) A comparison of Phragmites australis in freshwater and brackish marsh environments in North America. Wetl Ecol Manag 8:89–103

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson LA, Lambert AM, Saltonstall K (2010a) A tale of three lineages: expansion of common reed (Phragmites australis) in the US Southwest and Gulf Coast. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 3:515–520

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson LA, Viola DV, Brown RN (2010b) Hybridization of invasive Phragmites australis with a native subspecies in North America. Biol Invasions 12:103–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson LA, Lambertini C, McCormick MK, Whigham DF (2012) Hybridization of common reed in North America? The answer is blowing in the wind. AoB Plants. https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/pls022

  • Moser K, Ahn C, Noe G (2007) Characterization of microtopography and its influence on vegetation patterns in created wetlands. Wetlands 27:1081–1097

    Google Scholar 

  • Munger GT (2002) Lythrum salicaria. In: Fire Effects Information System. https://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/forb/lytsal/all.html

  • Niering WA, Warren RS, Weymouth GC (1977) Our dynamic tidal marshes, vegetation changes as revealed by peat analysis [Connecticut]. Bulletin-Connecticut Arboretum (USA)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ochterski J (2003) Controlling cattails. Cornell Coop Ext. http://albany.cce.cornell.edu/environment/ponds/controlling-cattails

  • Olson BE, Lindsey K, Hirschboeck V (2004) Habitat management plan: Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Brigham City, UT

    Google Scholar 

  • Oring LW, Neel L, Oring KE (2000) Intermountain west regional shorebird plan. US Shorebird Conservation Plan

    Google Scholar 

  • Orson RA (1999) A paleoecological assessment of Phragmites australis in New England tidal marshes: changes in plant community structure during the last few millennia. Biol Invasions 1:149–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmerlee AP, Young TP (2010) Direct seeding is more cost effective than container stock across ten woody species in California. Nativ Plants J 11:89–102

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul DS, Manning AE (2002) Great Salt Lake waterbird survey five-year report (1997–2001). Great Salt Lake Ecosystem Project, Utah Division of Wildlife Resource, Salt Lake City, UT

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul J, Vachon N, Garroway CJ, Freeland JR (2010) Molecular data provide strong evidence of natural hybridization between native and introduced lineages of Phragmites australis in North America. Biol Invasions 12:2967–2973

    Google Scholar 

  • Peach M, Zedler JB (2006) How tussocks structure sedge meadow vegetation. Wetlands 26:322–335

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrin D, Hauber DP (1999) Isozyme variation among populations of the clonal species, Phragmites australis (Cav) Trin ex Steudel. Aquat Bot 63:241–259

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Penning WE, Mjelde M, Dudley B, Hellsten S, Hanganu J, Kolada A, van den Berg M, Poikane S, Phillips G, Willby N, Ecke F (2008) Classifying aquatic macrophytes as indicators of eutrophication in European lakes. Aquat Ecol 42:237–251

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Peter CR, Burdick DM (2010) Can plant competition and diversity reduce the growth and survival of exotic Phragmites australis invading a tidal marsh? Estuar Coasts 33:1225–1236

    Google Scholar 

  • Price AL, Fant JB, Larkin DJ (2014) Ecology of native vs introduced Phragmites australis (common reed) in Chicago-area wetlands. Wetlands 34:369–377

    Google Scholar 

  • Quirion B, Simek Z, Dávalos A, Blossey B (2018) Management of invasive Phragmites australis in the Adirondacks: a cautionary tale about prospects of eradication. Biol Invasions 20:59–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieger JP, Stanley J, Traynor R (2014) Project planning and management for ecological restoration. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts AJ (2013) Avian diets in a saline ecosystem: Great Salt Lake, Utah, USA. Hum Wildl Interact 7:158–168

    Google Scholar 

  • Robichaud CD, Rooney RC (2017) Long-term effects of a Phragmites australis invasion on birds in a Lake Erie coastal marsh. J Gt Lakes Res 43:141–149

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohal CB (2018) Invasive Phragmites australis management in Great Salt Lake wetlands: context dependency and scale effects on vegetation and seed banks. Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/7228

  • Rohal CB, Hambrecht KR, Cranney C, Kettenring KM (2017) How to restore Phragmites-invaded wetlands. Utah Agric Exp Stn Res Rep 224:2

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohal CB, Kettenring KM, Sims K, Hazelton ELG, Ma Z (2018) Surveying managers to inform a regionally relevant invasive Phragmites australis control research program. J Environ Manag 206:807–816

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rohal CB, Cranney C, Hazelton ELG, Kettenring KM (2019a) Invasive Phragmites australis management outcomes and native plant recovery are context dependent. Ecol Evol 9:13835–13849

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rohal CB, Cranney C, Kettenring KM (2019b) Abiotic and landscape factors constrain restoration outcomes across spatial scales of a widespread invasive plant. Front Plant Sci 10:481

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Saltonstall K (2002) Cryptic invasion by a non-native genotype of the common reed, Phragmites australis, into North America. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99:2445–2449

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Saltonstall K (2011) Remnant native Phragmites australis maintains genetic diversity despite multiple threats. Conserv Genet 12:1027–1033

    Google Scholar 

  • Saltonstall K, Castillo HE, Blossey B (2014) Confirmed field hybridization of native and introduced Phragmites australis (Poaceae) in North America. Am J Bot 101:211–215

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Saltonstall K, Lambert AM, Rice N (2016) What happens in Vegas, better stay in Vegas: Phragmites australis hybrids in the Las Vegas Wash. Biol Invasions 18:2463–2474

    Google Scholar 

  • Sciance MB, Patrick CJ, Weller DE, Williams MN, McCormick MK, Hazelton ELG (2016) Local and regional disturbances associated with the invasion of Chesapeake Bay marshes by the common reed Phragmites australis. Biol Invasions 18:2661–2677

    Google Scholar 

  • Shuford WD, Roy VL, Page GW, Paul DS (1995) Shorebird surveys in wetlands at Great Salt Lake, Utah. Point Reyes Bird Observatory Report no. 708

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith LM, Kadlec JA (1983) Seed banks and their role during drawdown of a North American marsh. J Appl Ecol 20:673–684. https://doi.org/10.2307/2403534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SWCA (2012) Definition and assessment of Great Salt Lake health. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Salt Lake City, UT. https://documents.deq.utah.gov/water-quality/standards-technical-services/great-salt-lake-advisory-council/activities/DWQ-2012-006862.pdf. Accessed 8 Apr 2019

  • SWCA (2013) Final Great Salt Lake comprehensive management plan and record of decision. https://www.scribd.com/document/294220307/Final-Great-Salt-Lake-Comprehensive-Management-Plan-and-Record-of-Decision. Accessed 19 Mar 2019

  • Taddeo S, de Blois S (2012) Coexistence of introduced and native common reed (Phragmites australis) in freshwater wetlands. Écoscience 19:99–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Thayer DD, Pfingsten IA, Cao L, Berent L (2019) Potamogeton crispus L: US Geological Survey, Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database, Gainesville, FL. https://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/factsheet.aspx?SpeciesID=1134. Accessed 6 Apr 2019

  • Thomas SM, Lyons JE, Andres BA, T-Smith EE, Palacios E, Cavitt JF, Royle JA, Fellows SD, Maty K, Howe WH, Mellink E, Melvin S, Zimmerman T (2012) Population size of snowy plovers breeding in North America. Waterbirds 35:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Thursby J (2004) Ritual identity: hunting and feasting in Utah and southeastern Idaho. West Folk 63:101–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilley DJ, St John L (2013) Hydroseeding improves field establishment of Nebraska sedge regardless of seed treatment. Native Plants J 14:89–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D (1994) Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats. Ecology 75:2–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Tu M, Hurd C, Randall JM (2001) Weed control methods handbook: tools & techniques for use in natural areas. The Nature Conservancy

    Google Scholar 

  • Tulbure MG, Johnston CA (2010) Environmental conditions promoting non-native Phragmites australis expansion in Great Lakes coastal wetlands. Wetlands 30:577–587

    Google Scholar 

  • Urbanska KM (1997) Safe sites—interface of plant population ecology and restoration ecology. Restor Ecol Sustain Dev 81–110

    Google Scholar 

  • US Fish & Wildlife Service (2019) National Wetlands Inventory website. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish & Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA NRCS (2019) PLANTS database. https://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/java/

  • Utah Department of Agriculture and Food (2019) State of Utah noxious weed list. https://ag.utah.gov/farmers/plants-industry/noxious-weed-control-resources/state-of-utah-noxious-weed-list/

  • Utah Division of Water Quality (2015) Ecological characteristics of potential reference standard sites for Great Salt Lake impounded wetlands: 2014 & 2015. Survey: http://DWQ-2015-017187.pdf

  • Utah Division of Water Quality (2016) Ecological characteristics of Great Salt Lake fringe wetlands. Utah Division of Water Quality. https://documents.deq.utah.gov/water-quality/standards-technical-services/gsl-website-docs/wetlands-program/wetland-monitoring-assessment/DWQ-2015-017187.pdf

  • Vest JL, Conover MR (2011) Food habits of wintering waterfowl on the Great Salt Lake, Utah. Waterbirds 34:40–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Waheed A, Qureshi R, Jakhar GS, Tareen H (2009) Weed community dynamics in wheat crop of district Rahim Yar Khan, Pakistan. Pak J Bot 41:247–254

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb JA, Wallis EM, Stewardson MJ (2012) A systematic review of published evidence linking wetland plants to water regime components. Aquat Bot 103:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Weller MW (1999) Wetland birds: habitat resources and conservation implications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Whalen MA (2015) Frankenia pulverulenta. In: Flora of North America Editorial Committee, eds. 1993+. Flora of North America North of Mexico. 20+ vols. New York and Oxford. Vol 6, p 411. http://beta.floranorthamerica.org/Frankenia_pulverulenta

  • Whyte RS, Bocetti CI, Klarer DM (2015) Bird assemblages in Phragmites dominated and non-Phragmites habitats in two Lake Erie coastal marshes. Nat Areas J 35:235–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Willis CG, Baskin CC, Baskin JM, Auld JR, Venable DL, Cavender-Bares J, Donohue K, de Casas RR, The NESCent Germination Working Group (2014) The evolution of seed dormancy: environmental cues, evolutionary hubs, and diversification of the seed plants. New Phytol 203:300–309

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson SD, Keddy PA (1986) Species competitive ability and position along a natural stress/disturbance gradient. Ecology 67:1236–1242

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu CA, Murray LA, Heffernan KE (2015) Evidence for natural hybridization between native and introduced lineages of Phragmites australis in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Am J Bot 102:805–812

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wurtsbaugh WA, Miller C, Null SE, DeRose RJ, Wilcock P, Hahnenberger M, Howe F, Moore J (2017) Decline of the world’s saline lakes. Nat Geosci 10:816–821

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zedler JB, Kercher S (2004) Causes and consequences of invasive plants in wetlands: opportunities, opportunists, and outcomes. Crit Rev Plant Sci 23:431–452

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman CL, Shirer RR, Corbin JD (2018) Native plant recovery following three years of common reed (Phragmites australis) control. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 11:175–180

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the many agencies and organizations whose funding supported the primary research synthesized in this book chapter including the Community Foundation of Utah; Delta Waterfowl; Ducks Unlimited Canada; FRIENDS of Great Salt Lake; Intermountain West Joint Venture; Kennecott Utah Copper Charitable Foundation; the Salt Institute; Society of Wetland Scientists; Southshore Wetlands and Wildlife Management, Inc.; US Fish & Wildlife Service, Utah Department of Agriculture and Food; Utah Division of Forestry, Fire & State Lands; Utah Division of Water Quality; Utah Division of Wildlife Resources; Utah State University Ecology Center; Utah State University Research and Graduate Studies; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Utah Public Lands Initiative; Utah Waterfowl Association; Utah Wetlands Foundation; Wasatch Front Water Quality Council; Western Integrated Pest Management Center; and The Wetland Foundation. We greatly appreciate the many landowners along GSL who have been our partners in wetland research and management. M. Dunphy and N. Berg provided helpful feedback on an earlier version of this book chapter. This research was supported by the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, Utah State University, and approved as journal paper number 9234.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ecology Center and Department of Watershed Sciences, Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA

    Karin M. Kettenring & Emily E. Tarsa

  2. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Utah Department of Natural Resources, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

    Chad R. Cranney

  3. Utah Division of Water Quality, Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

    Rebekah Downard

  4. Utah Division of Forestry, Fire & State Lands, Utah Department of Natural Resources, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

    Keith R. Hambrecht

  5. Utah Geological Survey, Utah Department of Natural Resources, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

    Diane R. Menuz

  6. Department of Environmental Horticulture, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA

    Christine B. Rohal

Authors
  1. Karin M. Kettenring
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chad R. Cranney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rebekah Downard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Keith R. Hambrecht
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Emily E. Tarsa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Diane R. Menuz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Christine B. Rohal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karin M. Kettenring .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Great Salt Lake Institute, Westminster College, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

    Bonnie K. Baxter

  2. Great Salt Lake Institute, Westminster College, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

    Jaimi K. Butler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kettenring, K.M. et al. (2020). Invasive Plants of Great Salt Lake Wetlands: What, Where, When, How, and Why?. In: Baxter, B., Butler, J. (eds) Great Salt Lake Biology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40352-2_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation