1. ERDC Knowledge Core
  2. Federally Sponsored Research Programs Reports
  3. Wetlands Research Program (WRP)
  4. Publication
  5. Technical Report
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11681/6458
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorPolasek, Len Gerard, 1970-en_US
dc.contributor.authorJensen, Kent Charles, 1955-en_US
dc.contributor.authorWeller, Milton Webster-
dc.creatorTexas A & M University. Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciencesen_US
dc.creatorWetlands Research Program (U.S.)en_US
dc.creatorU.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Stationen_US
dc.date.accessioned2016-03-23T20:09:51Zen_US
dc.date.available2016-03-23T20:09:51Zen_US
dc.date.issued1995-10en_US
dc.identifier.govdocTechnical Report WRP-SM-8en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11681/6458en_US
dc.descriptionTechnical Reporten_US
dc.description.abstractEffects of partial drawdowns, drawdown timing, and tilling on vegetation and seed production for waterfowl were tested in ponds at the Lewisville Aquatic Ecosystem Research Facility in north-central Texas. Vegetation lists, percent cover (PC), and aboveground biomass (AGB) revealed that partial drawdowns produced a typical zonation of wetland plants: submergent macrophytes in deep-flooded zones; cattail (Typha sp.), black willow (Salix nigra), and sedges in shallow-flooded zones; forbs in moist zones adjacent to water; and grasses in upper, drier zones. Seed production of grasses, sedges, and forbs generally reflected the vegetation present in each soil-moisture zone. Taxon richness of emergent plants was highest in dewatered zones. Drawdown timing did not affect taxon richness of emergent plants within dewatered zones, but grass AGB and forb and sedge PC and AGB were highest during 1993 spring drawdown. The majority of grasses and forbs had higher seed production during 1992 late-summer/early-fall drawdown, whereas sedges produced more seeds during the spring drawdown. Black willow occurred most frequently, and cattail was first recorded during spring drawdown. Most submergent macrophytes were unaffected by drawdown timing. Soil disturbance with rototilling created diversity in ponds by increasing taxon richness of emergent plants, encouraging annuals, and discouraging perennials. PC, AGB, and seed production of forbs and grasses generally increased and decreased, respectively, with tilling, whereas sedges were not affected. Cattail and black willow occurred most frequently in tilled areas. Most submergent macrophytes were not affected by tilling, except southern naiad (Najas guadalupensis), with higher PC in tilled plots. Finally, observations revealed that waterfowl visiting ponds utilized regions according to water depth and plant communities. Gadwall (Anas strepera) and American wigeon (A. americana) were most often observed within deep zones supporting submergent vegetation. Although data were not statistically significant, blue-winged teal (A. discors) and green-winged teal (A. crecca) occurred most often in shallow zones supporting emergent vegetation and seeds. Therefore, partial drawdowns, variations in drawdown timing, and soil disturbance were effective in providing a variety of vegetation and seeds for a diversity of migrant and wintering waterfowl.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipPrepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC 20314-1000en_US
dc.description.tableofcontentsPreface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix 1-Introduction and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2-Study Area and Pond Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3-Vegetation and Seed Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Pond morphology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Experimental design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Soil-moisture measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Tillage measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Vegetation sampling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Seed collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4-Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Soil-Moisture and Tillage Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Moist -Soil Zone Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Plant frequencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Soil-moisture effects on vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Tillage effects on vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Drawdown timing effects on vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Flooded-Zone Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Plant taxon frequencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Tillage effects on vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Drawdown timing effects on vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Water-depth effects on vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Seed Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Seed taxon frequencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Soil-moisture effects on seed production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Tillage effects on seed production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Drawdown timing effects on seed production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 5-Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Seed Bank Response to a Partial Drawdown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Seed production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Flooded-zone vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Soil-Disturbance Effects on Seed Banks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Seed production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Flooded-zone vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 Drawdown Timing Effects on Seed Banks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Seed production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Flooded-zone vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 6-Waterfowl Feeding Patterns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 7-Conclusions and Management Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Appendix A: Soil Textures for Nontilled and Tilled Plots in Research Ponds at the Lewisville Aquatic Ecosystem Research Facility, Lewisville, TX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A 1 Appendix B: Bailey and Poulton Rating Scale Used to Estimate Percent Cover for Vegetation Within Ponds at the Lewisville Aquatic Ecosystem Research Facility, Lewisville, TX . . . . . . . . . . . . . B 1 Appendix C: Mean Seed Weights of 16 Emergent Plants Within Three Ponds During 1992 and 1993 Studies at the Lewisville Aquatic Ecosystem Research Facility, Lewisville, TX . . . . . . . . . . . . . C1 Appendix D: Mean Seed Biomass Produced by Emergent Plants Within Three Ponds During 1992 and 1993 Studies at the Lewisville Aquatic Ecosystem Research Facility, Lewisville, TX . . . . . . . . . . . . . D1 Appendix E: Chemical Analyses of Soils Collected in Three Experimental Ponds at the Lewisville Aquatic Ecosystem Research Facility, Lewisville, TX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E1 SF298en_US
dc.format.extent82 pagesen_US
dc.format.mediumPDFen_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherU.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Stationen_US
dc.relationhttp://acwc.sdp.sirsi.net/client/en_US/search/asset/1040685en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesTechnical Report (Wetlands Research Program (U.S.)) ; no. Technical Report WRP-SM-8en_US
dc.rightsApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited.en_US
dc.sourceThe ERDC Library created this digital resource using one or more of the following: Zeta TS-0995, Zeutcehl OS 12000, HP HD Pro 42-in. map scanner, Epson flatbeden_US
dc.subjectMoist-soil managementen_US
dc.subjectWetland habitatsen_US
dc.subjectTexasen_US
dc.subjectWaterfowl habitat managementen_US
dc.subjectWintering waterfowlen_US
dc.subjectReservoirsen_US
dc.subjectAquatic plantsen_US
dc.subjectVegetationen_US
dc.titleManagement of shallow impoundments to provide emergent and submergent vegetation for waterfowlen_US
dc.typeReporten_US
Appears in Collections:Technical Report

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
TR-WRP-SM-8.pdf31.55 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show simple item record