Effect of Typha domingensis cutting: Response of benthic macroinvertebrates and macrophyte regeneration

  • Published source details Silveira T.C.L., Rodrigues G.G., Coelho de Souza G.P. & Würdig N.L. (2012) Efeito do corte de Typha domingensis: Resposta dos macroinvertebrados bentônicos e a regeneração da macrófita. Biota Neotropica, 12, 124-132.


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Cut/mow herbaceous plants to maintain or restore disturbance: freshwater marshes

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Cut/mow herbaceous plants to maintain or restore disturbance: freshwater marshes

    A replicated, controlled study in 2005 in a freshwater marsh in southern Brazil (Silveira et al. 2012) reported that cutting southern cattail Typha domingensis reduced its density and biomass for <60 days. After 1–26 days, cut plots contained fewer mature cattail stems than uncut plots (cut: 05; uncut: 1944 stems/m2) and less above-ground cattail biomass (cut: 50–70; uncut: 350–470 g/m2). After 60–182 days, cut and uncut plots contained a statistically similar number of mature stems (cut: 1623; uncut: 1629 stems/m2) and above-ground biomass (cut: 230420; uncut: 300–440 g/m2). The density of young stems and dead stems never significantly differed between cut and uncut plots (see original paper for data). Methods: In June 2005, eight 1-m2 plots were established in a dense stand of southern cattail. Four plots were cut. Cuttings were removed. Four plots were left uncut. All cattail stems (mature: >80 cm tall; young: <80 cm tall; dead) were counted and measured in each plot until December 2005. Dry, above-ground biomass was estimated from stem heights.

    (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