Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T03:44:21.702Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cattle Grazing Effects on Phragmites australis in Nebraska

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jerry D. Volesky ,
Stephen L. Young  and
Karla H. Jenkins
Jerry D. Volesky*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, West Central Research and Extension Center, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, North Platte, NE 69101
Stephen L. Young
Affiliation:
Soil and Crop Sciences Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Karla H. Jenkins
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Panhandle Research and Extension Center, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Scottsbluff, NE 69361
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: jerry.volesky@unl.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Phragmites australis (common reed) is one of the most widely distributed flowering plants in North America. The introduced lineage occurs in wetland and riparian areas covering a range of climatic types. In Nebraska, an abundance of livestock could help to reduce P. australis with proper timing and grazing intensities. In 2011, a 3-yr study was initiated to evaluate targeted cattle grazing and herbicide effects and the nutritive value of this species. Treatments included a single application of imazapyr (Habitat®, BASF Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC) herbicide applied in the first year, grazing, and a control. Grazing was applied for up to five consecutive days in June and August 2011 and 2012 and in June 2013. Stem density, height, and biomass of P. australis were determined before each grazing period and in 2014. Diet samples were collected from rumenally fistulated steers each grazing period. Imazapyr provided 100% control of P. australis; however, re-establishment began 2 yr posttreatment. Grazing significantly reduced pregrazing P. australis biomass in the second and third growing season (P < 0.05). Stem density and height in the grazed treatment was similar to the control through 2012; however, in 2013 and 2014, control stem density was 1.5 times greater and height was 1.4 times that of the grazed treatment. Crude protein content of diet samples was greater in 2011 (16.8%) compared with 2012 (14.3%, P < 0.05). In vitro dry matter digestibility (IVDMD) of diet samples (45.4%) was not affected by year or month (P > 0.05). The relatively low IVDMD suggests that some form of energy supplementation would be needed to create a better nutritional balance. The cumulative effect of grazing does have the potential to reduce P. australis populations, but other methods would have to be used for greater control and site restoration.

Keywords

Common reed, Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steud. PHRCOCommon reedcrude proteindigestibilitygrazing managementherbicidestargeted grazingwetlands
Type
Research
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , June 2016 , pp. 121 - 127
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

Allen, LJ, Harbers, LH, Schalles, RR, Owensby, CE, Smith, EF (1976) Range burning and fertilizing related to nutritive value of bluestem grasses. J Range Manage 29: 306–308 Google Scholar
[AOAC] Association of Official Analytical Chemists (1996) Official Methods of Analysis. 16th edn. Arlington, VA: AOAC International. 1141 pGoogle Scholar
Auble, GT, Scott, ML, Friedman, JM (2005) Use of individualistic streamflow-vegetation relations along the Fremont River, Utah, USA to assess impacts of flow alteration on wetland and riparian areas. Wetlands 25: 143–154 Google Scholar
Ausden, M, Hall, M, Pearson, P, Strudwick, T (2005) The effects of cattle grazing on tall-herb fen vegetation and mollusks. Biol Conserv 122: 317–326 Google Scholar
Baran, M, Váradyová, Z, Krácmar, S, Hedbávny, J (2002) The common reed (Phragmites australis) as a source of roughage in ruminant nutrition. Acta Vet Brno 71: 445–449 Google Scholar
Brundage, A (2010) Grazing as a management tool for controlling Phragmites australis and restoring native plant biodiversity in wetlands. M.S. thesis. College Park, MD: University of Maryland. 88 pGoogle Scholar
Carlson, ML, Kowalski, KP, Wilcox, DA (2009) Promoting species establishment in a Phragmites-dominated Great Lakes coastal wetland. Nat Area J 29: 263–280 Google Scholar
Corbin, JD, D'Antonio, CM (2012) Gone but not forgotten? Invasive plants' legacies on community and ecosystem properties. Invasive Plant Sci Manage 5: 117–124 Google Scholar
Engel, RK, Nichols, JT, Dodd, JL, Brummer, JE (1998) Root and shoot responses of sand bluestem to defoliation. J Range Manage 51: 42–46 Google Scholar
Geisert, BG, Klopfenstein, TJ, Adams, DC, MacDonald, JC (2006) Comparison of in vivo digestibility to in vitro digestibility of five forages fed to steers. J Anim Sci 84 (Suppl 2): 104 Google Scholar
Glenn, EP, Nagler, PL (2005) Comparative ecophysiology of Tamarix ramosissima and native trees in western U.S. riparian zones. J Arid Environ 61: 419–446 Google Scholar
Gucker, CL (2008) Phragmites australis . In Fire Effects Information System (FEIS). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory. http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/. Accessed June 27, 2011Google Scholar
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:plu001. DOI: 10.1093/aobpla/plu001Google Scholar
Herrick, BM, Wolf, AT (2005) Invasive plant species in diked vs. undiked Great Lakes wetlands. J Great Lakes Res 31: 277–287 Google Scholar
Holm, LG, Plocknett, DL, Pancho, JV, Herberger, JP (1977) The World's Worst Weeds: Distribution and Biology. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii. 609 pGoogle Scholar
Kilbride, KM, Paveglio, FL (1999) Integrated pest management to control reed canarygrass in seasonal wetlands of southwestern Washington. Wildl Soc B 27: 292–297 Google Scholar
Knezevic, SZ, Datta, A, Rapp, RE (2008) Noxious Weeds of Nebraska: Common Reed. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska–Lincoln Extension Rep. EC08-166. 8 pGoogle Scholar
Kustu, MD, Fan, Y, Robock, A (2010) Large-scale water cycle perturbation due to irrigation pumping in the US High Plains: a synthesis of observed streamflow changes. J Hydrol 390: 222–244 Google Scholar
Lyford, M (1993) Reed canary grass controls tested (Minnesota). Restor Manage Notes 11: 169 Google Scholar
Marten, GC, Hovin, AW (1980) Harvest schedule, persistence, yield, and quality interactions among four perennial grasses. Agron J 72: 378–387 Google Scholar
Merritt, DM, Wohl, EE (2002) Processes governing hydrochory along rivers: hydraulics, hydrology, and dispersal phenology. Ecol Appl 12: 1071–1087 Google Scholar
Meyerson, LA, Saltonstall, K, Windham, L, Kiviat, E, Findlay, S (2000) A comparison of Phragmites australis in freshwater and brackish march environments in North America. Wetl Ecol Manage 8: 89–103 Google Scholar
Meyerson, LA, Viola, DV, Brown, RN (2010) Hybridization of invasive Phragmites australis with a native subspecies in North America. Biol Invasions 12: 103–111 Google Scholar
Mullahey, JJ, Waller, SS, Moser, LE (1990) Defoliation effects on production and morphological development of little bluestem. J Range Manage 43: 497–500 Google Scholar
Mullahey, JJ, Waller, SS, Moser, LE (1991) Defoliation effects on yield and bud and tiller numbers of two Sandhills grasses. J Range Manage 44: 241–245 Google Scholar
National Climatic Data Center (2014) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Centers for Environmental Information. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov. Accessed July 14, 2015Google Scholar
Rapp, RE, Datta, A, Irmak, S, Arkebauer, TJ, Knezevic, SZ (2012) Integrated management of common Reed (Phragmites australis) along the Platte River in Nebraska. Weed Technol 26: 326–333 Google Scholar
Reece, PE, Brummer, JE, Engel, RK, Northup, BK, Nichols, JT (1996) Grazing date and frequency effects on prairie sandreed and sand bluestem. J Range Manage 49: 112–116 Google Scholar
Saltonstall, K, Glennon, K, Barnett, A, Hunter, RB, Hunter, K (2007) Comparison of morphological variation indicative of ploidy level in Phragmites australis (Poaceae) from eastern North America. Rhodora 109: 415–429 Google Scholar
Saltonstall, K, Lambert, A, Meyerson, LA (2010) Genetics and reproduction of common (Phragmites australis) and giant reed (Arundo donax). Invasive Plant Sci Manage 3: 495–505 Google Scholar
Saltonstall, K, Stevenson, JC (2007) The effect of nutrients on seedling growth of native and introduced Phragmites australis . Aquat Bot 86: 331–336 Google Scholar
Silliman, BR, Mozdzer, T, Angelini, C, Brundage, JE, Esselink, P, Bakker, JP, Gedan, KB, van de Koppel, J, Baldwin, AH (2014) Livestock as a potential biological control agent for an invasive wetland plant. PeerJ 2: e567. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.567Google Scholar
Smart, AJ, Derner, JD, Hendrickson, JR, Gillen, RL, Dunn, BH, Mousel, EM, Johnson, PS, Gates, RN, Sedivec, KK, Harmoney, KR, Volesky, JD, Olson, KC (2012) Effects of grazing pressure on efficiency of grazing on North American Great Plains rangelands. Rangeland Ecol Manag 63: 397–406 Google Scholar
Smith, EF, Young, VA (1959) The effect of burning on the chemical composition of little bluestem. J Range Manage 12: 139–141 Google Scholar
Tilley, JMA, Terry, RA (1963) A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. J Brit Grassl Soc 18: 104–111 Google Scholar
Ullah, A, Rundquist, DC, Derry, DP (2000) Characterizing spectral signatures for three selected emergent aquatic macrophytes: a controlled experiment. Geocarto Int 15: 29–39 Google Scholar
van Deursen, EJM, Drost, HJ (1990) Defoliation and treading by cattle of reed Phragmites australis . J Appl Ecol 27: 284–297 Google Scholar
Vulink, JT, Drost, HJ, Jans, L (2000) The influence of different grazing regimes on Phragmites- and shrub vegetation in the well-drained zone of a eutrophic wetland. Appl Veg Sci 3: 73–80 Google Scholar
Waramit, N (2010) Native Warm-Season Grasses: Species, Nitrogen Fertilization, and Harvest Date Effects on Biomass Yield and Composition. Ph.D dissertation. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Paper 11863. 202 pGoogle Scholar
Weiss, WP (1994) Estimation of digestibility of forages by laboratory methods. Page 644 in Fahey, GC Jr., ed. Forage Quality, Evaluation and Utilization. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America Google Scholar
Whyte, RS, Trexel-Kroll, D, Klarer, DM, Shields, R, Francko, DA (2008) The invation and spread of Phragmites australis during a period of low water in a Lake Erie coastal wetland. J Coastal Res 55: 111–120 Google Scholar