Study

The establishment and management of emergent vegetation in sewage-fed artificial marshes and the effects of these marshes on water quality

  • Published source details Ulrich K.E. & Burton T.M. (1984) The establishment and management of emergent vegetation in sewage-fed artificial marshes and the effects of these marshes on water quality. Wetlands, 4, 205-220

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Reduce frequency of vegetation harvest: freshwater marshes

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation

Reduce frequency of cutting/mowing: freshwater marshes

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Reduce frequency of vegetation harvest: freshwater marshes

    A replicated, paired, controlled study in 1980–1981 in two artificial water treatment marshes dominated by cattails Typha spp. in Michigan, USA (Ulrich & Burton 1984) reported that harvesting cattail less frequently during one summer increased its biomass the following summer. Statistical significance was not assessed. Nine months after the last harvest, cattail biomass was 390 g/m2 in plots harvested every six weeks and 190 g/m2 in plots harvested every three weeks. There was a similar but less extreme pattern one year after the last harvest: cattail biomass was 760 g/m2 in plots harvested every six weeks and 600 g/m2 in plots harvested every three weeks. At both times, cattail biomass in unharvested plots was 620 g/m2. Methods: In June 1980, nine plots were established in each of two cattail-dominated marshes. Over 12 weeks, six plots (three plots/marsh) were cut every six weeks and six plots (three plots/marsh) were cut every three weeks. Cuttings were removed. The remaining six plots remained unharvested. In June and August 1981, above-ground cattail biomass was collected from each plot, then dried and weighed.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

  2. Reduce frequency of cutting/mowing: freshwater marshes

    A replicated, paired, controlled study in 1980–1981 in two artificial water treatment marshes dominated by cattails Typha spp. in Michigan, USA (Ulrich & Burton 1984) reported that cutting cattail less frequently during one summer increased its biomass the following summer. Statistical significance was not assessed. Nine months after the last cut, cattail biomass was 390 g/m2 in plots cut every six weeks and 190 g/m2 in plots cut every three weeks. There was a similar but less extreme pattern one year after the last cut: cattail biomass was 760 g/m2 in plots cut every six weeks and 600 g/m2 in plots cut every three weeks. At both times, cattail biomass in uncut plots was 620 g/m2. Methods: In June 1980, nine plots were established in each of two cattail-dominated marshes. Over 12 weeks, six plots (three plots/marsh) were cut every six weeks and six plots (three plots/marsh) were cut every three weeks. Cuttings were removed. The remaining six plots remained undisturbed. In June and August 1981, above-ground cattail biomass was collected from each plot, then dried and weighed.

    (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 18

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 Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust