Study

Wetland plant responses to varying degrees of purple loosestrife removal in southeastern Ontario, Canada

  • Published source details Gabor T.S., Haagsma T. & Murkin H.R. (1996) Wetland plant responses to varying degrees of purple loosestrife removal in southeastern Ontario, Canada. Wetlands, 16, 95-98.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use herbicide to control problematic plants: freshwater marshes

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Use herbicide to control problematic plants: freshwater marshes

    A replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in 1991–1994 in a floating freshwater marsh invaded by purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria in Ontario, Canada (Gabor et al. 1996) found that the effect of spraying herbicide on the density of sedges, grasses and purple loosestrife depended on the dose. After 2–3 years, the density of sedges Carex spp. did not significantly differ between sprayed plots (68–322 stems/m2) and unsprayed plots (150–199 stems/m2). Grass density did not significantly differ between plots sprayed with low-medium herbicide doses (sprayed: 80–177 stems/m2) and unsprayed plots (47–65 stems/m2). However, it was significantly greater (vs no spraying) in plots sprayed with high herbicide doses (124–161 stems/m2). Purple loosestrife density did not significantly differ between plots sprayed with low herbicide doses (27–41 stems/m2) and unsprayed plots (36–56 stems/m2). However, it was significantly lower (vs no spraying) in plots sprayed with medium-high herbicide doses (1–15 stems/m2). Methods: In summer 1991, twelve 30-m2 plots were established, in three blocks of four, in a loosestrife-invaded marsh. Three plots (one random plot/block) were sprayed with each dose of triclopyr amine: low (4 kg/m2), medium (8 kg/m2) or high (12 kg/m2). The other three plots were not sprayed. In July and August 1993 and 1994, plant stems were counted in three 1-m2 quadrats/plot.

    (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