{"id":3897,"date":"2020-06-16T08:28:07","date_gmt":"2020-06-16T08:28:07","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/versicolor.ca\/sandylakebedford\/?page_id=3897"},"modified":"2020-06-16T09:39:10","modified_gmt":"2020-06-16T09:39:10","slug":"phragmites","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/versicolor.ca\/sandylakebedford\/invasive-species\/invasive-plants\/phragmites\/","title":{"rendered":"Phragmites"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>

Phragmites_in_Amsterdam_2013 (Wikipedia<\/a>)<\/p><\/div>
\nTOPIC: Catling & company on invasive Phragmites in the Maritimes<\/strong>
\nFrom posts of NatureNS Listserv, available publicly under Birding News<\/a><\/p>\n

On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 <\/strong>at 12:13 PM Frederick W. Schueler wrote:
\nMaritimers,<\/p>\n

Listening to the discussion of the Tantramar marshes on the Sunday
\nEdition yesterday, and not hearing any discussion of invasive European
\nPhragmites there, I’m forwarding this warning from 2004, and from 2010 –
\nhttps:\/\/karstaddailypaintings.blogspot.com\/2010\/10\/view-from-beausejour.html<\/a>
\n– in the hopes that there’s some possibility of action.<\/p>\n

from the 2010 report<\/strong>: “This is the one place in the Maritimes where the
\ninvasive European Phragmites australis subspecies australis has been
\nreported, so we are interested in seeing how conditions here compare to
\nwhat we’d observed elsewhere in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia… we
\ndrove the busy road across the marshes both ways, waypointing stands and
\ntaking representative specimens…<\/p>\n

“The first thing we noticed was that the stands were very distinctly
\ndivided into native-like and invasive-like kinds: we counted 11 alien
\nand 7 native stands, and only 1 that we called ambiguous, though the
\nnatives graded out into little whisps, and we doubtless missed some of
\nthese which an observer on foot could have waypointed. The most striking
\nfeature of this difference was the persistent green foliage of the
\naliens, in contrast to the shriveled get-ready-for-winter brown of the
\nnatives (one often sees that alien plants from NW Europe retain green
\nleaves far longer than native plants do).<\/p>\n

“Those on NatureNS will remember that throughout Nova Scotia we were
\nperplexed by the intermediacy and confusing morphology of the majority
\nof the Phragmites stands we sampled there: at Tantramar there was no
\nambiguity, and the natives didn’t look much different from the ones we
\nsee in Ontario”.<\/p>\n

Those of us in Ontario have seen how completely the invasive Phragmites
\ncan take over wide areas, and really wish action could be taken in the
\nMaritimes before the task becomes impossible.<\/p>\n

fred.<\/p>\n

The 2004 Report<\/strong>
\nSubject: Catling & company on invasive Phragmites in the Maritimes (& Nfld)<\/strong>
\nDate: Tue, 16 Mar 2004<\/strong> 10:39:08 -0500
\nFrom: Frederick W. Schueler
\nOrganization: Bishops Mills Natural History Centre
\nTo: NATURENB@LISTSERV.UNB.CA <\/p>\n

New Brunswickers,<\/p>\n

I urge you to read the appended article (which has just come out in
\nBEN), very carefully, and to take action to suppress stands of the alien
\nrace. All you need to do is to drive along the eastern shore of NB, and
\nthen drive along the shore roads of New Jersey (solid alien Phragmites
\nas far as the eye can see), to envisage just what you don’t want your
\nprovince to become. The Fundy shore is more different from New Jersey,
\nso the geomorphic comparison isn’t so close, but solid stands of
\nPhragmites would be equally undesireable there.<\/p>\n

fred.<\/p>\n

BOTANICAL ELECTRONIC NEWS No. 324, March 16, 2004
\n Victoria, B.C.
\n———————————————————–
\n Dr. A. Ceska, P.O.Box 8546, Victoria, B.C. Canada V8W 3S2
\n———————————————————–<\/p>\n

STATUS OF THE ALIEN RACE OF COMMON REED (_PHRAGMITES AUSTRALIS_)
\nIN THE CANADIAN MARITIME PROVINCES
\nFrom: Paul M. Catling*, Gisele Mitrow*, Lynn Black*, Susan Carbyn**
\n * Agriculture and AgriFood Canada, Environmental Health, Biodiversity,
\n Saunders Bldg., C.E.F., Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C6 catlingp@agr.gc.ca
\n **Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Environmental Health, Biodiversity
\n 32 Main Street, Kentville, Nova Scotia B4N 1J5<\/p>\n

An alien race of Common Reed (presumably the European _Phrag-
\nmites australis_ (Cav.) Trin. ssp. _australis_) has been rapidly
\nspreading along roadsides and invading and dominating wetlands
\nin parts of southern Ontario and Quebec since the early 1990s
\n(Schueler 2000a, b, Robichaud & Catling 2003, Catling et al.
\n2003). The invasion and domination of native plant communities
\nled to a substantial reduction in native biodiversity (e.g.
\nCatling et al. 2003, Lavoie et al. 2003). Very recently the
\nstatus of the alien race has been clarified in other parts of
\nCanada (e.g. Martin 2003, Schueler et al. 2003). However, in the
\nCanadian maritime provinces its status has been unclear until
\nrecently when both field study and a database of herbarium
\nrecords was completed. The herbarium records database includes
\ndata from all major herbarium collections in Canada (including
\nthose of particular importance with regard to the maritimes such
\nas ACAD, CAN, DAO, MT, MTMG, NFLD, NSPM, UNB). The value of
\nherbarium specimens in understanding status and spread was
\nincreased when a method of distinguishing the races using the
\nfloral character of lower glume length (Robichaud & Catling
\n2003) made it possible to identify many herbarium specimens
\nlacking the distinctive lower stem characters. The alien in-
\nvasive race was distinguished from the native race by having
\nfirst glumes 4.1 mm long or less and lower stem internodes
\nyellow or brownish instead of reddish-purple (Robichaud & Ca-
\ntling 2003). A chemical method for distinguishing the races has
\nalso recently become available (Saltonstall 2003). The following
\nnotes, arranged by province, are derived from response to
\nseveral questions regarding the status of the alien race in the
\nmaritime region.<\/p>\n

NEWFOUNDLAND:<\/p>\n

The only record is that of a specimen collected from Stephen-
\nville Barachois by R. Day in 1991 (DAO). The native race has
\napparently not been recorded in the province.<\/p>\n

NEW BRUNSWICK:<\/p>\n

Of the locations mapped by Hinds (2000, p. 606), only that
\ncollected from 2 km S of Beaver Dam in Sunbury County by H. R.
\nHinds in 1981 (MTMG, UNB) was referable to the introduced race.
\nA depauperate specimen from the salt marsh at St. Louis Cape in
\nKent County collected by P. R. Roberts and B. Pugh in 1965 (UNB)
\nhas a lower glumes approx. 4.0 mm long but lacks stem and was
\nnot assigned to race. In 2003 the alien race was collected by P.
\nM. Catling at two locations on the Trans Canada highway at
\nSackville (DAO). Here it occurred within 20 m of the paved edge
\nof the highway. From here it may spread into the adjacent
\nTantramar Marshes and displace the native race of _P.
\naustralis_, (which is presumably referable to ssp.
\n_berlandieri_, see Fernald 1932). Schueler (2000b, 2002) found
\n_Phragmites australis_ absent from sides of major roads in New
\nBrunswick (and Prince Edward Island) so that the occurrence in
\nthe Sackville area along the major highway is almost certainly a
\nrecent phenomenon. This conclusion is supported by the small
\nsize of the clones present, i.e. only several m2.<\/p>\n

PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND:<\/p>\n

At the present time only the native race is known from Prince
\nEdward Island and it is considered rare in the province (Day &
\nCatling 1991). It was collected from the Dunk River estuary in
\nBedeque by M. L. Fernald and H. St. John in 1914 (CAN, MT) and
\nlater by D. Erskine and A. J. Smith in 1953 (DAO, MT). Plants
\nreported from Lennox Island (Day & Catling 1991) have not been
\nseen.<\/p>\n

NOVA SCOTIA:<\/p>\n

Most of the locations mapped for Nova Scotia (Roland & Smith
\n1969, Zinck 1998) represent the native race. The obvious excep-
\ntions are the specimens from Annapolis Royal and Bridgetown. The
\nalien race was first collected at Annapolis Royal in by J.
\nMacoun in 1910 (CAN), and subsequently by M. L. Fernald and B.
\nLong in 1921 (ACAD, CAN, MT), by H. E. Perry and M. V. Roscoe in
\n1928 (ACAD), by G. C. Warren in 1938 (ACAD), W. G. Dore in 1940
\n(DAO), F. Kinsman in 1949 (DAO), M. S. Brown in 1949 (NSPM), P.
\nDouglas in 1949 (NSPM), J. R. Jotchan in 1978 (ACAD), E. Specht
\nin 1979 (ACAD), P. M. Catling, S. Carbyn and J. Achenbach in
\n2003 (DAO). It is believed in Annapolis Royal that the alien
\nrace was introduced with straw on trains carrying Elephants and
\nother circus animals in the early 1900s (J. Achenbach, pers.
\ncomm.). It is locally called Elephant Grass. For many decades
\nthe occurrence of this gigantic (to 4 m tall in one season)
\ngrass in and around Annapolis Royal was recognized as a remark-
\nable occurrence. Interestingly the Common Reed growing around
\nAnnapolis Royal was used to thatch a restored Acadian dwelling
\nin the same way that the Acadians used the native race. Prior to
\nthe dyking which began around 1700, the native race may have
\nbeen much more abundant in the Fundy tidal marshes.<\/p>\n

The alien race was also recorded relatively early at Bridgetown.
\nHere H. G. Perry and M. V. Roscoe made a collection in 1928
\n(ACAD, MTMG, NSPM). Despite the continuity of collections from
\nAnnapolis Royal, there was a gap of 44 years until another
\nlocality of the alien race was recorded, this being from South
\nBrookfield where it was collected by P. L. Comeau and J. M.
\nStanley in 1972 (NSPM). There are several more recent collec-
\ntions; Big Pine Lake by M. Zinck and R. Ogilvie in 1992 (NSPM),
\nSable River by R.E. and R.B. Newell in 1993 (ACAD), south side
\nof Annapolis River at Middleton by P.M. Catling in 2003 (DAO),
\njunction of Trans Canada Highway 104 at Highway 102 by P. M.
\nCatling (DAO), Highway 101 at Grand Pr\u00e9 by S. Carbyn in 2003
\n(DAO), 2 km W of Dodge Road overpass on Hwy 101 3 km W of exit
\n17 (Kingston\/Greenwood) by S. Carbyn in 2003 (DAO),1 km W of
\nexit 16 Hwy 101(Aylesford exit) by S. Carbyn in 2003. All of
\nthese are within 20 m of a paved road suggesting that vehicles
\nand roads are the means and pathway of invasion.<\/p>\n

Conclusions<\/p>\n

Although the alien race became established in the maritimes
\nalmost 100 years ago, it appears to have spread only recently
\nand is apparently spreading by means of vehicle traffic on
\nroads. This parallels the situation elsewhere in eastern Canada
\n(Catling et al. 2003). Although the alien race is invading
\nagricultural land, including cornfields in southern Quebec, its
\nmost serious impact to date has been the replacement of diverse
\nnative vegetation in wetlands with significant loss of biodiver-
\nsity in general. Considering its impact on Atlantic coastal
\nmarshes in the United States (e.g. Blossey 2002, Marks et al.
\n1994, Meyerson et al. 2000), marshes along the St. Lawrence
\nRiver (e.g. Lavoie et al. 2003) and wetlands in southern Ontario
\n(pers. ob.), it is considered a threat to the biodiversity of
\nthe Bay of Fundy marshes. Since its spread into much of the
\nregion is recent, there is an opportunity for regional control,
\nespecially around major brackish marshes. For example, invasion
\nof the upper levels of the Tantramar Marshes, at the head of the
\nBay of Fundy, may be prevented by eliminating patches invading
\nalong the Trans Canada highway (hwy 104), and monitoring the
\nadjacent marshlands.<\/p>\n

Acknowlegements<\/p>\n

Jef Achenbach of Annapolis Royal assisted with field work in the
\nAnnapolis valley region. The development of a database was
\nsupported by the Federal Biodiversity Information Partnership.<\/p>\n

References<\/p>\n

Blossey, B. 2002. Replacement of native North American _Phrag-
\n mites australis_ by introduced invasive genotypes. _Botanical
\n Electronic News_ 284: 1-3.
\n http:\/\/www.ou.edu\/cas\/botany-micro\/ben\/ben284.html<\/p>\n

Catling, P. M., F. W. Schueler, L. Robichaud and B. Blossey.
\n 2003. More on _Phragmites_ – native and introduced races.
\n _Canadian Botanical Association Bulletin_ 36(1): 4 – 7.<\/p>\n

Erskine, D. S. 1985. _The plants of Prince Edward Island_.
\n Research Branch, Agriculture Canada publication 1798 (publi-
\n cation 1088, 1960, reprinted). 272 p.<\/p>\n

Fernald, M. L. 1932. _Phragmites communis_ Trin. var. _berlan-
\n dieri_ (Fournier) comb. nov. _Rhodora_ 34: 211-212.<\/p>\n

Hinds, H. R. 2000. _Flora of New Brunswick_. 2nd edition.
\n University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick. 695
\n p.<\/p>\n

Lavoie, C., M. Jean, F. Delisle and G. Letourneau. 2003. Exotic
\n plant species of the St. Lawrence River wetlands: a spatial
\n and historical analysis. _Journal of Biogeography_ 30: 537-
\n 549.<\/p>\n

Marks, M., B. Lapin and J. Randall. 1994. _Phragmites australis_
\n (_P. communis_): Threats, management, and monitoring.
\n _Natural Areas Journal_ 14: 285-294.<\/p>\n

Martin, M. 2003. Common Reed (_Phragmites australis_) in the
\n Okanagan Valley, British Columbia, Canada. _Botanical
\n Electronic News_ 318: 1.
\n http:\/\/www.ou.edu\/cas\/botany-micro\/ben\/ben318.html<\/p>\n

Meyerson, L. A., K. Saltonstall, L. Windham, E. Kiviat, and S.
\n Findlay. 2000. A comparison of _Phragmites australis_ in
\n freshwater and brackish marsh environments in North America.
\n _Wetlands Ecology and Management_ 8: 89-103<\/p>\n

Robichaud, L. and P. M. Catling, 2003. Potential value of glume
\n length in differentiating native and alien races of Common
\n Reed, _Phragmites australis_. _Botanical Electronic News_
\n 310: 1-3.
\n http:\/\/www.ou.edu\/cas\/botany-micro\/ben\/ben310.html<\/p>\n

Roland, A.E. and E.C. Smith. 1969. _The flora of Nova Scotia_.
\n Nova Scotia Museum. Reprinted from _Proceedings of the Nova
\n Scotian Institute of Science_, 26: 1-238, 277-743.<\/p>\n

Saltonstall, K. 2003. A rapid method for identifying the origin
\n of North American Phragmites populations using RFLP analysis.
\n Wetlands 23(4): 1043-1047.<\/p>\n

Schueler, F. W. 2000a. Monster Grass an Invasive or Native. _SER
\n Ontario News (Newsletter of the Ontario Chapter of the
\n Society for Ecological Restoration_) 6(1), Spring 2000. 2 p.
\n www.serontario.org\/pdfs\/may00.pdf<\/p>\n

Schueler, F. W. 2000b. GPS Surveys for _Phragmites_ and other
\n invasives. _SER Ontario News (Newsletter of the Ontario
\n Chapter of the Society for Ecological Restoration_) 6(1),
\n Spring 2000. 2pp. www.serontario.org\/pdfs\/may00.pdf<\/p>\n

Schueler, F. W. 2002. Distribution of roadside _Phragmites_ in
\n Canada. _Phragmites australis_: A Sheep in Wolf’s Clothing?
\n _Technical Forum 6-9 January 2002, Vineland New Jersey_,
\n abstract pp 27-28.<\/p>\n

Schueler, F. W., A. Karstad and J. H. Schueler. 2003. Non-native
\n _Phragmites communis_ in British Columbia. _Botanical
\n Electronic News_ 315: 1
\n http:\/\/www.ou.edu\/cas\/botany-micro\/ben\/ben315.html<\/p>\n

Zinck, M. 1998. _Roland’s flora of Nova Scotia_. Nimbus Pub-
\n lishing and Nova Scotia Musem. Halifax. 2 vol. 1296 p.<\/p>\n

=================================================<\/p>\n

COMMENT BY N. HILL<\/strong><\/p>\n

Nick Hill
\nTo: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
\nCc: naturenb@listserv.unb.ca, Catling, Paul , Conservation Council of New Brunswick<\/p>\n

Mon., Jun. 15 at 9:25 p.m.<\/p>\n

Phragmites australis<\/em> ssp. australis<\/em> occurs at various places on many of the 100 series highways (103, 101, 102 , 107 ). While it is good to eliminate the plant where feasible, there is a trade-off between the pain (e.g. the disturbance of herbiciding areas of the Tantramar) and the gain. From a terrestrial wetland point of view, I can’t vouch for the biodiversity value of the Tantramar–it seems an anthropogenically disturbed landscape, but correct me if mistaken. There are good reasons to eliminate Phragmites australis<\/em> ssp. australis<\/em> where it is scattered along these 100 series highways because they are small patches and conduits to high biodiversity wetlands throughout the province…e.g. the marshes of the Musquodoboit valley or riparian marshes of SW Nova that support the native subspecies americanus. <\/p>\n

The native subspecies is more delicate, the culms are thinner– usually reddish (vs. green-yellow)–and in my experience, they are most common on wind-exposed, lakeshore fens. While ssp americanus<\/em> has a S4 ranking, I would say it was rare.
\nNick
\n————————————————————
\nCOMMENT BY D, WEBSTER<\/strong>
\n* this reply doesn’t distinguish between the native and invasive forms
\nof Phragmites.<\/p>\n

fred.
\n———————————–<\/p>\n

On 15-Jun.-20 7:16 p.m., David Webster wrote:<\/p>\n

> Some decades ago the east coast had this “dire problem” of purple
\n> loosestrife. The seeds of this plant float in water so it spread down
\n> ditches rapidly and the ditches became full of this plant. This was
\n> perceived to be a problem ! When in fact free erosion control was really
\n> a blessing.
\n>
\n> Phragmites does very well in saline or fresh soils or swamps where
\n> nothing else can grow well. In the Netherlands it has been used for many
\n> generations to ripen polders recently partioned from the sea. Because
\n> the plants has much aerenchyma in the rhizomes it can prosper in
\n> anaerobic, structureless, undrainable soil. And decay of these rhizomes
\n> overtime gradually generates structured, fertile, drainable soil.
\n>
\n> In NS it has become far more widespread than it was 70 years ago
\n> due to mowing of 100 series ditches and I presume accidental spreading
\n> of rhizomes on machinery parts.
\n>
\n> No doubt the Tantramar marshes have a problem; an ocean which keeps
\n> rising.<\/p>\n

——————————<\/p>\n

MORE INFO<\/p>\n

View Wikipedia: Phragmites<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

TOPIC: Catling & company on invasive Phragmites in the Maritimes From posts of NatureNS Listserv, available publicly under Birding News On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 12:13 PM Frederick W. Schueler wrote: Maritimers, Listening to the discussion of the Tantramar … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":1975,"menu_order":10,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-3897","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/versicolor.ca\/sandylakebedford\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3897","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/versicolor.ca\/sandylakebedford\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/versicolor.ca\/sandylakebedford\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/versicolor.ca\/sandylakebedford\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/versicolor.ca\/sandylakebedford\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3897"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/versicolor.ca\/sandylakebedford\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3897\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3908,"href":"https:\/\/versicolor.ca\/sandylakebedford\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3897\/revisions\/3908"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/versicolor.ca\/sandylakebedford\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1975"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/versicolor.ca\/sandylakebedford\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3897"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}