CHAPTER 3

AQUATIC PLANT BIOLOGY


It is not the facts which the student pursues as his ultimate aim, but the general laws underlying the facts. He is an unfortunate man who sees the trees, but cannot perceive the forest, who can see the stones of which the cathedral is constructed and show how they were lifted to their places, but cannot perceive the beauty of the structure as it stands in its exquisite proportions, its massive masonry and wealth of sculptured detail only serving to express the idea of beauty and harmony in the master mind of the architect.C. Dwight Marsh -Scientist

Introduction

Most aquatic plant research has been stimulated by the need to control nuisance species such as Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), elodea (Elodea canadensis), coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum), curly-leaf pondweed (Potamogeton crispus), water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes), hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata), and alligator-weed (Alternanthera philoxeroides). Understanding aquatic plant biology is important to the immediate problems of managing aquatic plants and aquatic ecosystems and it makes the development of new management techniques, the application of present techniques, and the assessment of environmental impacts more efficient. Interest in restoring and restructuring macrophyte communities and an appreciation for the littoral zone (littoral zone is that portion of a water body extending from the shoreline lakeward to the greatest depth occupied by rooted plants) is growing. There is also a need to make management results more predictable, especially when considered in a long-term ecosystem context.

The development of effective and environmentally acceptable aquatic plant management programs also requires some knowledge of lake and reservoir limnology (limnology is the scientific study of the physical, chemical, geological, and biological factors that affect aquatic productivity and water chemistry in freshwater ecosystems-lakes, reservoirs, rivers, and streams). Many limnological processes affect the kind and distribution of aquatic plants and aquatic plants also impact, nutrient, chemical and temperature regimes and other biota in a lake or reservoir, especially in the littoral zone.

A single chapter cannot review all the macrophyte biology, ecology, and limnology (Hutchinson 1975; Wetzel 1983; Cole 1983) that might be relevant to aquatic plant management and it is not our intent to do so. We will provide information that is most applicable to plant management efforts including information about the basic types of aquatic plants, the habitat factors that determine plant distribution, the influence aquatic plants have on the littoral zone, and the relationship between aquatic plants and other organisms including epiphytes, macroinvertebrates, fish, and wildlife.

Types of Aquatic Plants

The type of aquatic and wetland plants (macrophytes) of interest to most aquatic plant management programs can be classified into four groups: Emergent, Floating-leaved, Submersed, and Freely floating. Aquatic macrophytes, by definition, are the macroscopic (large enough to be observed by the naked eye) forms of aquatic and wetland plants found in water bodies. The term aquatic macrophytes refers to a diverse group of aquatic plants and encompasses flowering vascular plants, mosses, ferns, and macroalgae.

Emergent macrophytes (plants that are rooted in substrate with the tops of the plant extending into the air) grow on periodically inundated or submersed soils. Most emergent macrophytes are perennials (plants or plant parts living for greater than one year). They are typically rooted in the bottom, have their base portions submersed in water, and have their tops elevated into the air. This is ideal for plant growth. Nutrients are available from the sediment, water is available from the sediment and overlying water, carbon dioxide and sunlight are available to the emergent portions of the plant.

Emergent plants have to be strongly rooted and much energy is put into producing a strong structure to withstand the wind and waves in the shallow water zone. Many species need mud flats to spread by seeds but they can spread into deeper water by sprouting from an expanding roots or underground stem (rhizome) systems. In northern climates the dry dead stems often supply oxygen for root respiration during the winter when the lakes are locked under ice. Cutting off dead stems below the water surface before the lake freezes limits oxygen supplies and sometime kills rhizomes - a potentially useful management technique.

Common emergent macrophytes include plants such as reeds (Phragmites spp.), bulrushes (Scirpus spp.), cattails (Typha spp.), and spikerushes (Eleocharis spp.). Some emergents, wild rice (Zizania spp.) for example, have submersed or floating leaves before mature aerial leaves form.

Floating-leaved macrophytes (plants that are rooted to the lake bottom with leaves that float on the surface of the water) generally occur in areas of a lake that do not occasionally dry out. Common representatives include waterlilies (Nymphaea spp.), spatterdock (Nuphar spp.), and watershield (Brasenia spp.). Floating leaves are attached to roots or rhizomes with a flexible, tough stem (actually in many cases a leaf stalk). Some floating-leaved macrophytes, like Nuphar spp., can exist in a submersed form for a considerable time. Many floating-leaved species form large colonies from spreading underground rhizomes. In northern climates, under winter drawdown conditions, frost will often "heave" the rhizomes out of the bottom, which helps thin dense stands.

Floating leaves live in two extremely different habitats, water on the bottom, air on top. A thick, waxy coating protects the top of the leaf from the aerial environment this makes herbicidal control difficult without the addition of special chemicals called adjuvants (wetting agents) to help the herbicide stick to and penetrate the waxy surface. Adjuvants are also used on many kinds of emergent and free-floating species when treating with herbicides for the same reason. Floating leaves can be ravaged by wind and waves so these plants are usually found in protected areas.

Submersed macrophytes (plants that grow completely submersed under the water) are a diverse group that includes quillworts (Isoetes spp.), mosses (Fontinalis spp.), muskgrasses (Chara spp.), stoneworts (Nitella spp.) and numerous vascular plants. Many submersed plants, such as widgeon-grass (Ruppia maritima), various pondweeds (Potamogeton spp.), and tape-grass (Vallisneria spp.), are native to the United States. Others like hydrilla, Eurasian watermilfoil and curly-leaf pondweed are not native and cause some of the worst aquatic nuisances.

Submersed species face special problems obtaining light for photosynthesis and they must obtain carbon dioxide from the water where it is much less available than it is in air. Submersed species invest much less energy into structural support because they are supported by water and water accounts for about 95% of the weight of these submersed species.

Free floating macrophytes (plants that typically float on or just under the water surface with their roots in the water and not in sediment) are a diverse group of aquatic plants. Small free floating plants include duckweeds (Lemna spp.), mosquito fern (Azolla caroliniana) and water fern (Salvinia spp.). Larger surface floating plants include water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes), frog's bit (Limnobium spongia).

Free floating species are entirely dependent on the water for their nutrient supply. In fact, some (e.g., water hyacinth) have been used in wastewater treatment to remove excess nutrients. If nutrient limitation will work for macrophyte management, this is the group where it is most likely to work. The location of these plants is at the whims of wind, waves, and current so they will likely be found in quiet locations and embayments.

The above is a general description of aquatic plant groups and some of the biology pertinent to their management. One excellent resource for this type of information is the Aquatic Plant Information Retrieval System at the University of Florida, Center for Aquatic Plants, 7922 N. W. 71st Street, Gainesville, Florida (http://aquat1.ifas.ufl.edu/). Control tactics are often species specific and as management plans are devised you will want to know exactly what species are present, where they are located, and in what abundance. This takes some technical knowledge but help is usually readily available through natural resource agencies, universities, museums, natural history surveys, and private consultants.

The Littoral Zone

Rooted aquatic plants inhabit the littoral zone, the interface between dry land and open water of lakes and reservoirs. The littoral zone is defined by where plants will grow. It is the area from the lake's edge to the maximum water depth where plant growth occurs. Because most lakes and reservoirs in the United States are relatively small and shallow the littoral zone often contributes significantly to a water body's productivity and it can be a major factor regulating lake or reservoir ecosystems (Wetzel 1983). The littoral zone has traditionally been divided into four rather distinct transitional zones: the eulittoral, upper littoral, middle littoral, and lower littoral (Wetzel 1983).

The eulittoral constitutes that part of the shoreline that lies between the highest and lowest seasonal water levels. It often contains many wetland plants. The upper littoral is commonly called the emergent plant zone because it is dominated by emergent plants like cattails and bulrushes. This zone generally extends from the waters edge to depths of 3 to 6 feet (1 to 2 m).

The middle littoral is dominated by floating-leaved plants like fragrant waterlily (Nymphaea odorata), yellow waterlily (Nymphaea mexicana) and American lotus (Nelumbo lutea). The middle littoral zone extends lakeward from the upper littoral zone to water depths of 3 to 9 feet (1 to 3 meters).

The lower littoral zone is where most submersed plants are found and typically extends from the floating-leaved plant zone down to the limits of the photic zone (photic zone is the area of a lake where photosynthesis can occur and is defined by the depth to which at least 1 percent of the surface light intensity penetrates) where light tends to be insufficient for macrophyte growth. In clear waters, submersed vascular macrophytes can colonize to depths of 30 to 45 feet (10 to 15 m).

Factors Regulating Plant Growth

Different species of aquatic plants live in different "worlds" - sediment, water, and air in different combinations. Most aquatic plants are secondarily adapted to life in the water having once lived on land and gradually evolving mechanisms to deal with a watery world.

The most important environmental factors affecting the abundance and distribution of aquatic macrophytes in lakes are light availability (Spence 1975; Chambers and Kalff 1985; Nichols 1992; and Canfield et al. 1985), lake trophic characteristics as they relate to nutrients and water chemistry, (Hutchinson 1975; Beal 1977; Kando 1982; Hoyer et al. 1996), substrate (sediment) characteristics (Pearsall 1920; Barko et al. 1986; Nichols 1992), and wind energy (Duarte and Kalff 1986; Dieter 1990). Lake morphology (e.g., shape, depth etc.), size, and watershed characteristics are related to these factors independently and in combination (Pearsall 1917; Spence 1982; Duarte and Kalff 1986; Gasith and Hoyer 1997).

Light Availability

Aquatic plants require light for growth, thus light availability is often considered the single most crucial environmental factor regulating the maximum depth of plant growth (Pearsall 1920; Spence 1975; Chambers and Kalff 1985). Light availability is directly linked to water clarity (Canfield et al. 1985; Chambers and Kalff 1985). As water depth increases or water clarity decreases both the amount and the spectral quality of light for photosynthesis at the lake bottom diminishes. Generally, submersed macrophytes will grow to a depth of 2-3 times the Secchi depth (depth at which a black and white disk lowered into a lake disappears). Thus, lakes with the majority of their bottom exceeding 2-3 times the Secchi depth will have fewer aquatic macrophytes. Even shallow lakes, if they are turbid enough, will have sparse aquatic plant growth (Engel and Nichols 1994; Nichols and Rogers 1997, in press).

Water clarity in most lakes is controlled by phytoplankton, organic color and both organic and inorganic suspended particles (Jones and Bachmann 1978; Canfield and Hodgson 1983; Hoyer and Jones 1983). Lakes with low phytoplankton concentrations and low color values have high water clarity. As phytoplankton and color levels increase, there is a rapid reduction in water clarity, aquatic macrophytes become light limited, and the size of the littoral zone can decrease. Conversely, the size of the littoral zone can increase if phytoplankton or color levels decrease which can occur where management efforts reduce nutrient levels in a lake.

The amount of non-algal suspended particles (suspended solids) in a lake is determined by the continuous processes of tributary input, sedimentation and resuspension. Shallow lakes with substantial layers of soft sediments and open to the wind often have high suspended solids concentrations due to wind mixing of bottom sediments. Suspended solids limit light for plant growth and decrease littoral zone size. Boat traffic, shoreline erosion, and biotic factors like common carp can increase suspended sediment.

Plant Nutrition, Trophic Status, and Water Chemistry

All things being equal, nutrient poor lakes are less productive than nutrient rich lakes (Hutchinson, 1975). A primary factor determining the trophic status (i.e., nutrient richness) of a lake is the geologic region where the lake occurs (Jones and Bachmann 1978; Canfield and Hoyer 1988). Watershed management practices and direct human-caused nutrient additions can also be important.

There are few substantiated reports of nutrient related growth limitation for aquatic plants (Barko et al. 1986). Nutrients supplied from sediments combined with those in solution are generally adequate to meet nutritional demands of rooted aquatic plants, even in oligotrophic (nutrient poor) systems (Barko et al. 1986). While this information suggests that nutrients do not limit growth of aquatic plants in oligotrophic lakes, these lakes generally maintain less total biomass of aquatic plants and usually different species than eutrophic (nutrient rich) lakes (Canfield and Hoyer 1992).

Rooted macrophytes usually fulfill their phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) requirements by direct uptake from sediments (Barko et al. 1986). The role of sediment as a direct source of P and N for submersed macrophytes is ecologically quite significant, because available forms of these elements are normally in very low concentration in the open water of aquatic systems during the growing season. Likewise, the availability of micronutrients in the open water is usually very low but they are relatively available in most sediments. However, the preferred source of some nutrients such as potassium (K), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), sulfate (SO4), sodium (Na), and (Cl) appears to be the open water.

Submersed macrophytes make use of both aqueous and sedimentary nutrient sources, and sites (roots vs. shoots) of uptake are related, at least in part, to nutrient-specific differences in sediment compared to overlying water nutrient availability. In other words, submersed plants are operating like good opportunistic species should operate; they take nutrient supplies from the most available source.

Inorganic carbon is the nutrient most likely limiting photosynthesis and growth of submersed macrophytes (Barko et al. 1986). The difficulty plants have in carbon dioxide (CO2) transport is known to limit photosynthesis in terrestrial plants and is even more critical in submersed species because the diffusion of CO2 in water is much slower than in air. Free CO2 is the more readily used carbon form for photosynthesis by freshwater submersed plants. Some species can utilize bicarbonate as a carbon source, but do so less efficiently. The ability to use bicarbonate has adaptive significance in many freshwater systems because the largest fraction of inorganic carbon exists as bicarbonate.

Besides influencing growth, general water chemistry (i.e., pH, alkalinity, conductivity ) influences the species composition in lakes and is an important factor determining plant distribution over broad geographic regions (Moyle 1956; Nichols and Yandell 1995; and Hoyer et al. 1996).

Hardwater/softwater, acid/alkaline, oligotrophic/eutrophic Ñ there is tremendous variety in the waters of the world but usually there are plants than can live there. Nutrient poor systems (oligotrophic) generally have less biomass or Percent of the lakes Volume Infested with aquatic plants (PVI) than nutrient rich systems (eutrophic). Oligotrophic systems, however, can still have a substantial Percentage of Lake Area Covered (PAC) with aquatic plants, up to 100% coverage while maintaining little plant biomass. Nutrient rich systems have the potential for both a large PAC and PVI. Hypereutrophic systems (very nutrient rich) have the potential for large PAC and PVI values but in some systems that have heavy phytoplankton growth the rooted plants can be shaded out, yielding low PAC and PVI values.

Substrate Characteristics

Bottom sediments act as a nutrient source and anchoring point for aquatic plants. Some bottom types (e.g., rocks or cobble) are so hard that plant roots cannot penetrate them. Others are so soft, flocculent, and unstable that they will not anchor plants. Extremely coarse-textured sediment (sand) can be so nutritionally poor for macrophyte growth that low level accumulation of organic matter from plant growth or erosion stimulates growth.

Anaerobic (no oxygen) conditions found in many lake sediments may have a profound effect on plant growth. Low dissolved oxygen concentrations, high concentrations of soluble reduced iron and manganese can be toxic to plants. Soluble sulfides including S= , HS-, and H2S are highly toxic to plants. High soluble iron concentrations interfere with sulfur metabolism and limit the availability of phosphorus. Sediments containing excessive organic matter often contain high concentrations of organic acids, methane, ethylene, phenols, and alcohols that can be toxic to vegetation. The above conditions are most frequently found in anaerobic (devoid of oxygen) sediments of eutrophic or hypereutrophic lakes. To some degree, aquatic plants can protect themselves from these toxins with oxygen released from roots, which eliminates the anaerobic conditions that create the toxic substances.

Lake Morphology - An Integrating Factor

Turbidity, nutrient concentration, sediment texture, sediment organic matter, siltation rates, wind and wave action are parameters identified as important factors determining aquatic plant distribution and abundance. These parameters are interrelated and interact with basin depth, bottom slope, surface area and shape to determine littoral zone size.

Lake basin forms are extremely variable. They reflect the water body's mode of origin and they are constantly being modified by water movements within the basin and sediment inputs from the watershed (Hutchinson 1975; Wetzel and Hough 1973). As basin form is modified, the size of the littoral zone in relation to a lake's open-water changes with most water bodies becoming shallower. Unless something or someone intervenes, littoral zone size increases as a water body gets older.

Water depth is one of the most critical environmental factors determining the lakeward extent of the littoral zone and the type of plants that grow in a water body. Where a lake's substrate exceeds 2-3 times the Secchi depth, submersed aquatic plants will be light limited and generally not able to grow. With some exceptions, a depth range between 30 and 45 ft (9 and 14 m) is the limit for most aquatic plants. Emergent and floating-leaved plants seldom grow in water exceeding 10 ft (3 m), so deep lakes also have limited emergent communities.

The steepness of the littoral slope is inversely related to the maximum biomass of submersed macrophytes (Duarte and Kalff 1986). Probably, this is due to the difference in sediment stability on gentle and steep slopes. A gently sloping littoral allows the deposition of fine sediments that promote plant growth. Steeply sloped littorals are areas of erosion and sediment transport (Pearsall 1917), areas not suitable for plant growth. The manipulation of lake depth and slope are both powerful tools when encouraging or discouraging the growth of aquatic plants in specific areas of a lake.

All lakes have a shoreline-water interface that receives energy from wind and waves. Surface area and shape significantly influence the effect wind can have on wave size and current strength. Large lakes tend to have larger fetches (area open to the prevailing wind) and thus have greater wave and current energy than lakes with small surface areas. Wave action and currents erode a terrace along the shoreline, leaving coarse material in shallow water and depositing finer materials in deep water. The direction and strength of the wind, slope, and shape of the lake basin determine where the substrates will move. Generally, points and shallows where wind and wave energy are highest tend to be swept clean. Bays and deep spots in a lake tend to fill with sediment. In England, Pearsall (1920) demonstrated that the variation in the quantity and quality of silt largely controls the distribution of submersed vegetation. Large lakes with many bays or coves may develop an extensive littoral zone because these areas are protected from strong waves and currents. Thus, basin size, shape, and depth determine to a large degree the distribution of sediments in a lake and therefore the distribution of aquatic plants.

The Effects of Macrophytes on Their Environment

Up to this point we have discussed the effects of the environment on macrophytes. Now it is time to discuss the converseÑthe effects of macrophytes on their environment. Natural ecosystems can experience massive changes in macrophyte biomass over time scales of decades to centuries. Management practices and the introduction of new species produce equally large changes over time scales of weeks or months. How are the amount of macrophytes and change in the amount of macrophytes likely to change the aquatic ecosystem? The effects are physical, chemical, and biological.

Dense stands of aquatic plants form a heavy shading canopy that significantly alters the photosynthetically available light under macrophyte stands (Adams et al. 1974). Shading and reduced water circulation allow vertical temperature gradients as steep as 18¡F (10¡C) over 3 ft (1m) of water to develop under macrophyte canopies (Dale and Gillespie 1977).

Reduction in water flow through macrophyte beds enhances deposition of fine sediment that would otherwise be eroded. Macrophyte beds also act as a sieve, retaining coarse particulate organic detritus. Both of these mechanisms increase the accumulation of sediments which is usually undesirable to shoreline users that like to swim or wade in the waters edge.

Daily dissolved oxygen changes as large as 8 mg/L occur in waters of dense submersed macrophyte stands. During daylight hours, while photosynthesis occurs, water can become supersaturated with oxygen. Respiration at night can deplete dissolved oxygen in dense beds with little water circulation. Dense growths of floating or matted submersed species decreases oxygenation by inhibiting oxygen exchange with the atmosphere.

Macrophytes influence nutrient cycles. Phosphorus for example, is removed from the sediment via plant roots and incorporated into plant biomass. When plant tissue dies, phosphorus is circulated, at least briefly, back into the water column. The extent and timing of this cycling can greatly influence phytoplankton growth. If nutrients are "tied up" in macrophyte biomass during the growing season, little is available for phytoplankton growth and the water in the littoral zone may be clearer than in deeper water zones. In northern lakes, if the nutrients are released in the fall, water temperatures are cool enough so phytoplankton blooms, at least noxious ones, do not occur. If macrophytes die during the spring or summer, as often happens with herbicide treatments, nutrients are released at an opportune time for phytoplankton growth.

Macrophyte death and decay also adds organic matter to the sediments. When and how much organic matter is added influences dissolved oxygen concentrations. If large amounts of dead organic matter are added to the lake under warm, still conditions, oxygen depletion and its associated impacts on aquatic organisms are a concern. This can occur if summer herbicide treatments are not well planned. In northern climates oxygen depletion occurs under ice and can be critical if decaying vegetation is extremely abundant.

Over the short-term, organic matter addition is a food source for benthic organisms. Over the long term, accretion of organic sediments causes expansion of the littoral zone and filling in the lake. In general, macrophyte stands are sinks for particulate matter and sources of dissolved phosphorus and inorganic carbon (Carpenter and Lodge 1986).

How important is all this to overall lake productivity and ecology? The importance of the littoral zone to whole lake primary productivity (the rate at which algae and macrophytes fix or convert light, water, and carbon to plant tissue in plant cells) varies with the size and volume of the lake and the size of the littoral zone in that lake. Small lakes generally have more miles of shoreline per acre of lake surface so they have more potential for a higher littoral zone productivity when compared to open water algal productivity. Thus, the importance of aquatic macrophytes and attached periphyton to the overall productivity of lakes decreases proportionately as lakes get larger and deeper (Rounsefell 1946; Tilzer and Serruya 1990; Gasith and Hoyer 1997). Shallow lakes, however, can also have a limited littoral zone with low submersed macrophyte abundance because of natural circumstances (low water clarity) or lake management activities (macrophyte control with herbicides, biocontrol, or mechanical harvesting). In these lakes, open-water algae would again dominate the total primary productivity of the systems.

Generally the more productive the littoral zone, the more productive the whole lake is likely to be, if your definition of productive is carbon fixed (total photosynthesis). There are, however, few herbivores in North America (invertebrates or fish) that derive energy directly from aquatic macrophytes (Hecky and Hesslein 1995). Recently, stable carbon isotope analysis (an analysis that follows the flow of carbon through a food web from primary producers through top carnivores) in a shallow Florida lake showed the carbon source for 12 species of fish and five species of invertebrates was primarily epiphytes (algae that grow attached to aquatic plants) and not eel-grass (Vallisneria americana), the rooted aquatic plant that covered 90% of the lake area (Hoyer et al. 1997). Thus, while eel-grass was fixing the majority of the carbon in the lake, the carbon fixed by periphyton was the major source being transferred through the food web.

The Biotic Component

Aquatic plants and attached periphyton in the littoral zone are food and habitat for a wide variety of organisms. Because this is a rather large and understudied topic we will discuss it separately from the other effects macrophytes have on their environment. The physical and chemical changes that macrophytes produce in the littoral impact the other organisms that live there. We separate the relationships only for ease of discussion and will emphasize the relationships with epiphytes and macroinvertebrates, fish, and wildlife species.

Epiphytes and Macroinvertebrates

Macrophytes are colonized by a rich array of microbes, particularly in hard water lakes where carbonate deposits provide a matrix for the epiphytes (Allanson 1973). Productivity of the epiphyte complex ranges from 4 to 93% of host macrophyte productivity (Carpenter and Lodge 1986). Epiphytes appear to be much more active than their hosts in dissolved nutrient exchange. (Howard-Williams 1981; Carignan and Kalff 1982).

High invertebrate densities typically associated with macrophytes may result from the epiphytic food available on macrophyte surfaces. Many invertebrates associated with macrophytes eat the epiphyte-detritus complex on the surface of the macrophytes rather than the macrophytes themselves (Hoyer et al. 1997).

A few invertebrates, however, feed directly on aquatic macrophytes. A classic case is the denuding of some macrophyte communities in northern Wisconsin lakes by the exotic (for this region) crayfish Orconectes rusticus (Lodge and Lorman 1987). Also, mining insects bore through plant tissue and some insects use plant tissue as habitat to lay eggs and nurture immature life stages. With these activities, insects destroy much more macrophyte tissue than they consume.

Invertebrates that live in sediments congregate beneath macrophytes as well . Some use plant remains as food and shelter. Others eat algae that cover sediments. The total abundance of invertebrates (primarily chironomid larvae) varied up to 196,000/m2 on and under Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) beds in a cove of the Hudson River, New York (Menzie 1980). In the Eau Galle Reservoir-Wisconsin, bottom dwelling organisms were more than ten fold greater in number in a coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum) bed than in an adjacent barren area with the same substrate (Miller et al. 1989). The inshore area, under macrophyte beds in Halverson Lake, Wisconsin contained 60% of the midge larvae and over 90% each of snails, fingernail clams and caddisfly, dragonfly, damselfly, and mayfly larvae (Engel 1985) in the lake.

Although the importance of invertebrates may not be obvious to many lake users, they can be a link between the production of macrophytes, phytoplankton, epiphytes and the energy (i.e. food) needs of recreationally important fish and wildlife species. Invertebrates are a major food source for forage fish and young life stages of many game fish. Young waterfowl depend heavily on invertebrates as a high protein food source needed for rapid early growth.

Fish

The interactions between fish and aquatic plants are highly variable which makes discussing generalities difficult. The relationships vary because of differences in aquatic systems, lake morphology, plant forms and abundances, fish species composition, and geographic area. Generally, however, there are fish species that decrease in abundance (e.g., bluespotted sunfish, Enneacanthus gloriosus), increase in abundance (e.g., gizzard shad, Dorosoma cepedianum) and maintain the same abundance (largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides) as aquatic macrophytes abundance decreases in a lake (Bailey 1978, Noble 1981; Maceina and Shireman 1985; Hoyer and Canfield 1994a).

Each lake has a carrying capacity for the total amount of fish, which is primarily determined by lake trophic status (Yurk and Ney 1989; Bachmann et al. 1996). Within that carrying capacity aquatic macrophytes can determine the fish species composition in a lake. High aquatic plant abundance favors fish species that are adapted to aquatic plants. Low aquatic plant abundance favors fish species that are adapted to open water. It is important to note here that the number of species in a lake generally remains the same and only the species composition changes. A good example of this is Lake Baldwin, Florida that went from 95% covered with hydrilla to <1% after the introduction of grass carp while maintaining the same fish species richness (Shireman et al. 1985).

A major factor determining the value of aquatic plants to fish species is whether the fish is a prey species or a predator species. The presence of aquatic macrophytes increases the physical structural complexity of lake ecosystems. This structural complexity provides refuge for prey species and interferes with the feeding of some predator species. Exposure to predators strongly determines small fish feeding behavior. If they are relatively safe from predators they can forage more effectively. For large predators, the visual barriers of plant stems decreases foraging efficiency; hence growth declines as habitats become more complex (Colle and Shireman 1980).

Sometimes small areas of littoral habitat, while not contributing significantly to the total production of the lake, are important for the reproduction or recruitment (i.e., spawning or nursery habitat) of some fish or other aquatic organisms. For example, although spawning on macrophytes is unusual for salmonids, at least a portion of the population of lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) in Lake Tahoe spawns in deep water (40-60m deep) over beds of Chara spp (Beauchamp et al. 1992). No additional evidence for spawning was found over rocky formations that exist at various depths in the lake. Apparently the Chara spp. mounds, which represent a small portion of the primary productivity in Lake Tahoe, are favored as they provide the basic requirements for successful egg incubation.

These are only a few of the important relationships that exist between aquatic plants and fish populations. Unfortunately, these relationships give little insight into how aquatic macrophytes affect "fishing." Some anglers enjoy fishing in aquatic plants and some do not, but most anglers agree that there can be too many aquatic plants for good fishing (King et al. 1978). Thus, the question boils down to how many plants are the right amount to provide habitat for fish populations and structure for anglers. Too few plants generally do not provide enough cover; too many may lead to stunted fish populations, poor predator growth and poor fishing. The common answer is a moderate amount of aquatic plants. Several studies have suggested optimum vegetative coverages for healthy fish populations ranging from 15-85% (Canfield and Hoyer 1992; Kilgore et al. 1993). It is important to note, however, that lakes with no aquatic plants and those with 100% volume infested with aquatic plants will both support fish populations. The problem is that some of these populations do not occur in the desired abundances or species compositions.

Wildlife

Similar to fish, the interaction between wildlife and aquatic plants is highly variable which makes discussing generalities difficult. Relationships vary by differences in the aquatic system, plant form and abundance, species of animal, life stage, and geographic area.

Herbivory of macrophytes by wildlife species is much more common than with fish and is probably an under appreciated aspect of energy and nutrient transfer in the littoral zone. Pelikan et al. (1971) reported that 9-14% of the net annual cattail production is consumed or used as lodge construction by muskrats. Smith and Kadlec (1985) reported that waterfowl and mammalian grazers reduced cattail production by 48% in the Great Salt Lake marsh. Muskrat grazing or "eat out" is important for maintaining diversity in the emergent zone. Open areas in the cattail marsh are produced that increase edge effect and allow submersed species and other emergent species to invade areas previously occupied by a single species of dense emergent vegetation.

Seeds, tubers, and foliage of submersed species are used as food by a variety of wildlife, especially waterfowl (Nichols and Vennie 1991). Plant material is often high in carbohydrates, which provide energy for long migratory flights. Anderson and Low (1976) estimated that waterfowl consumed 40% of the peak standing crop of sago pondweed in Delta Marsh, Manitoba. The scientific name of canvasback ducks (Aythya valisinera shows their close association with wild celery or eel-grass (Vallisneria americana) that they eat in abundance during fall migration and on their wintering grounds in Chesapeake Bay. A major concern about the Eurasian watermilfoil invasion is its displacement of wild celery in large shallow lakes in Minnesota, the upper Mississippi River, Wisconsin, and Chesapeake Bay--traditional resting areas for canvasbacks, a species with generally declining numbers.

Invertebrates produced in macrophyte beds are also important to wildlife production. They produce the protein that is vital to laying hens and chicks of many waterfowl and related waterbirds. Higher up the food chain eagles, osprey, loons, mergansers, cormorants, mink, otter, raccoons, and herons, to name a few, feed on fish or shellfish which dined on invertebrates that lived in aquatic plant beds.

Nesting sites in, or nesting materials from the emergent zone are important to species like red-winged and yellow headed blackbirds, marshwrens, grebes, bitterns, Canada geese, and muskrats. Sometimes the importance is not direct. Geese and other waterfowl sometime nest on top of muskrat houses or muskrat food piles made of cattails.

Richness of bird species is positively correlated to area and trophic status of Florida lakes but not with macrophytes (Hoyer and Canfield 1994b). As macrophyte abundance increases, however, birds that used open-water habitats are replaced by species that use macrophytes communities. Some bird species require specific types of aquatic vegetation and removal of that type may exclude individual bird species from a lake system.

A topic seldom discussed is the nutrient import and recycling ability of animals. Hoyer and Canfield (1994b) estimated that phosphorus loads into 14 Florida lakes by birds ranged from 0.1% to 9.1% of the annual phosphorus budget, an amount they thought was insignificant. The nutrient inputs to a small lake by a few hundred resting Canada geese after feeding all morning in a nearby cornfield may be a different matter. Nutrient budgets need to be analyzed on an individual lake basis to determine the significance of wildlife inputs.

A wildlife relationship of special concern is that between aquatic plants and mosquitoes. Prior to the invention of chemicals for mosquito control, the removal of aquatic plants was the dominant method of control. Some aquatic plant management is still done for mosquito control. Certainly anything that causes stagnant water and has no predators or offers protection from predators of mosquito larvae has the potential to support a mosquito nuisance. This includes temporary ponds, knotholes in trees, and old tires lying in the backyard. Where aquatic plants exacerbate these conditions they may contribute to the mosquito problem. If water circulation and predators are present, mosquitoes are much less of a nuisance.

Certain aquatic plants can prevent mosquitoes from laying eggs and others can prevent the development of adult mosquitoes (Angerilli and Beirne 1980; Matheson 1930). The presence of aquatic plants, however, does not necessarily mean there will be mosquito problems. Even the elimination of aquatic plants will not guarantee the control mosquitoes, so other mosquito control methods may be more suitable.

Contents

Center for Aquatic Plants Homepage