Study

Responses of wetland invertebrates and plants important in waterfowl diets to burning and mowing of emergent vegetation

  • Published source details de Szalay F.A. & Resh V.H. (1997) Responses of wetland invertebrates and plants important in waterfowl diets to burning and mowing of emergent vegetation. Wetlands, 17, 149-156.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use prescribed fire to control problematic plants: brackish/salt marshes

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation

Use cutting/mowing to control problematic herbaceous plants: brackish/salt marshes

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Use prescribed fire to control problematic plants: brackish/salt marshes

    A replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in 1992–1993 in an ephemeral brackish marsh dominated by saltgrass Distichlis spicata in California, USA (De Szalay & Resh 1997) found that burned plots had greater plant species richness than unburned plots, and lower overall vegetation cover, but similar or greater cover of dominant species other than saltgrass. After 11 months, burned plots had greater overall plant species richness than unburned plots (burned: 6.3 species/m2; unburned: 3.1 species/m2) but lower overall vegetation cover (burned: 88%; unburned: >99%). Burned plots had lower saltgrass cover (burned: 65%; unburned: 99%) despite a statistically similar saltgrass density under both treatments (burned: 2,000; unburned: 1,770 stems/m2). Of six other dominant herb species, two had greater cover in burned plots (burned: 9–11%; unburned: 0%) whilst four had statistically similar cover under each treatment (burned 2–17%; unburned: <1–5%). Density of these species was not reported. Methods: Ten pairs of 100-m2 plots were established in an impounded brackish marsh, managed for waterfowl (autumn/winter flooding with spring/summer drawdown) but dominated by saltgrass. In September 1992, ten plots were burned (one plot/pair; 50 m2/plot). The other plots were not burned. In August 1993, vegetation was surveyed in two 1-m2 quadrats/plot. Cover estimates included live and dead standing plants.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

  2. Use cutting/mowing to control problematic herbaceous plants: brackish/salt marshes

    A replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in 1992–1993 in an ephemeral brackish marsh dominated by saltgrass Distichlis spicata in California, USA (De Szalay & Resh 1997) found that mown and unmown plots had similar plant species richness, similar overall vegetation cover, and similar cover of dominant plant species. After one year, overall plant species richness did not significantly differ between mown plots (3.2 species/m2) and unmown plots (3.1 species/m2). The same was true for cover of vegetation overall (mown: 98%; unmown: >99%), saltgrass (mown: 93%; unmown: 99%) and each of six other dominant herb species (mown: 0–7%; unmown: 0–5%). However, mown plots did contain a greater density of saltgrass (4,070 stems/m2) than unmown plots (1,770 stems/m2). Density was not reported for the other six dominant herb species. Methods: Ten pairs of 100-m2 plots were established in an impounded brackish marsh, managed for waterfowl (autumn/winter flooding with spring/summer drawdown) but dominated by saltgrass. In August–September 1992, ten plots were hand-mown (one plot/pair; 50 m2/plot). Cuttings were not removed. The other plots were not mown. In August 1993, vegetation was surveyed in two 1-m2 quadrats/plot. Cover estimates included live and dead standing plants.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust