Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:59:28.379Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phenology and biomass dynamics of cattail (Typha subulata) in southern Argentina

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Maria T. Sobrero ,
M. R. Sabbatini  and
O. A. Fernández
M. R. Sabbatini
Affiliation:
CERZOS, Universidad Nacional del Sur, 8000 Bahía Blanca, Argentina
O. A. Fernández
Affiliation:
CERZOS, Universidad Nacional del Sur, 8000 Bahía Blanca, Argentina
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The phenology and biomass dynamics of Typha subulata were studied for 2 yr under two natural conditions, a marsh and an irrigation channel. Populations demonstrated a spring to summer growth pattern, with peak aboveground biomass in spring. The phenological phases identified for both populations were identical, but plants growing in the marsh averaged 38 and 28% less aboveground biomass and height, respectively, than plants growing in the channel. Noticeable differences were found in the timing of both phenological phases and biomass cycle between growth seasons, suggesting that the susceptibility of cattail to weed control during the seasons could vary between years.

Keywords

Above- and belowground biomass
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 45 , Issue 3 , June 1997 , pp. 419 - 422
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Bernard, J. M. and Fitz, M. J. 1979. Seasonal change in aboveground primary production and nutrient contents in a central New York Typha glauca ecosystem. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 106: 37–40.Google Scholar
Beule, J. D. 1979. Control and Management of Cattails in Southeastern Wisconsin Wetlands. Madison, WI: Department of Natural Resources Technical Bull. 112, pp. 1–40.Google Scholar
Bray, J. R. 1960. The chlorophyll content of some native and managed plant communities in central Minnesota. Can. J. Bot. 38: 313–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bray, J. R., Lawrence, D. B., and Pearson, L. C. 1959. Primary production in some Minnesota terrestrial communities. Oikos 10: 38–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crespo, S. and Perez Moreau, R. 1967. Revisión del Género Typha en la Argentina. Darwiniana 14: 413–429.Google Scholar
Davis, C. R. and Van der Valk, A. G. 1983. Uptake and release of nutrients by living and decomposing Typha glauca Godr. tissues at Eagle Lake, Iowa. Aquat. Bot. 16: 75–89.Google Scholar
Fiala, K. 1978. Under-ground organs of Typha angustifolia and Typha latifolia, their growth propagation and production. Acta Sci. Nat. Acad. Sci. Bohemoslov. Brno 12: 1–43.Google Scholar
Grace, J. B. 1989. Effects of water depth on Typha latifolia and Typha dominguensis . Am. J. Bot. 76: 762–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grace, J. B. and Harrison, J. S. 1986. The biology of Canadian weeds. Typha latifolia L.; Typha angustifolia L. and Typha glauca Godr. Can. J. Plant Sci. 66: 361–379.Google Scholar
Grace, J. B. and Wetzel, R. G. 1981. Phenotypic and genotypic components of growth and reproduction in Typha latifolia: experimental studies in marshes of differing successional maturity. Ecology 62: 789–801.Google Scholar
Hill, B. H. 1987. Typha productivity in Texas pond: implication for energy and nutrient dynamics in freshwater wetlands. Aquat. Bot. 27: 385–395.Google Scholar
Hunt, R. 1978. Plant growth analysis. Studies in Biology N° 96. Southampton, Great Britain: Edward Arnold. 67 p.Google Scholar
Jervis, R. A. 1969. Primary production in the freshwater marsh ecosystem of Troy Meadow, New Jersey. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 96: 209–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klopatek, M. and Stearn, F. W. 1978. Primary productivity of emergent macrophytes in a Wisconsin freshwater marsh ecosystem. Am. Mid. Nat. 110: 320–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krattinger, K. 1975. Genetic mobility in Typha . Aquat. Bot. 1: 57–70.Google Scholar
Lieffers, V. J. 1983. Growth of Typha latifolia in boreal forest habitats as measured by double sampling. Aquat. Bot. 15: 335–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linde, A. F., Janish, T., and Smith, D. 1976. Cattail. The Significance of its Growth, Phenology and Carbohydrate Storage to its Control and Management. Madison, WI: Department of Natural Resources Technical Bull. 94, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
McNaughton, S. J. 1966. Ecotype function in the Typha community type. Ecol. Monogr. 36: 297–324.Google Scholar
Patton, J. E. and Judd, W. S. 1988. A phenological study of 20 vascular plant species occurring on the Paynes Prairie Basin, Alachua County, Florida. Castanea 53: 122–131.Google Scholar
Robert, J. and Ganf, G. G. 1986. Annual production of Typha orientalis Presl. in inland Australia. Aust. J. Mar. Freshwater Res. 37: 659–668.Google Scholar
Shay, J. M. and Shay, C. T. 1986. Prairie marshes in western Canada with specific reference to the ecology of five emergent macrophytes. Can. J. Bot. 64: 443–454.Google Scholar
Sobrero, M. T., Fernandez, O. A., and Sabbatini, M. R. 1993. Seed germination of Typha subulata in relation to weed management. J. Aquat. Plant Manage. 31: 98–100.Google Scholar
Spencer, W. and Bowes, G. 1990. Ecophysiology of the world&s most troublesome aquatic weeds. in Pieterse, A. H. and Murphy, K. J., eds. Aquatic Weeds. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, pp. 39–73.Google Scholar
Squires, L. and Van der Valk, A. G. 1992. Water depth tolerance of the dominant emergent macrophytes of the Delta Marsh, Manitoba. Can. J. Bot. 70: 1860–1867.Google Scholar
Yeo, R. R. 1964. Life history of the common cattail. Weeds 12: 284–288.Google Scholar