Abstract
Dense monocultures ofPhragmites australis (common reed) have been rapidly expanding in Connecticut’s tidal wetlands at the expense of cordgrass (Spartina spp.) and cattail (Typha spp). Bird and vegetation surveys in 40 salt and brackish marshes showed that there were significantly fewer species of birds and state-listed species inPhragmites-dominated wetlands than in short-grass marshes. Seaside Sparrow. Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed Sparrow, and Willet, three marsh specialists adapted to nesting in short graminoids, had low frequencies in plots dominated byPhragmites. Marsh Wren and Swamp Sparrow, however, are marsh specialists that prefer tall, reedy vegetation, and both species had significantly greater densities at sites with morePhragmites or cattail. Although the bird communities of cattail sites andPhragmites sites were similar, the abundance of Virginia Rails was positively correlated with percent cover of cattail but notPhragmites. The extent of pools was positively related to bird species richness in short-grass meadows but not inPhragmites plots. InPhragmites-dominated wetlands, the height and density of reed stands may inhibit bird use of any pools that are present. Muskrats create pools that may enhance bird species richness, but populations of this mammal have dwindled during the same time period thatPhragmites increased in connecticut’s marshes. Although a few species may benefit from reed invasion, it has a negative impact on some marsh bird species that have already declined. These findings support the continued need for marsh restoration and the control of common reed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Literature Cited
Beecher, W. J. 1942. Nesting birds and the vegetative substrate. Chicago Ornithological Society. Chicago, IL, USA.
Benoit, L. K. 1997a. Summering bird use of the lower Connecticut River. Report to The Nature Conservancy, Connecticut Chapter. Middletown, CT, USA.
Benoit, L. K. 1997b. Impact of the spread ofPhragmites on populations of tidal marsh birds in Connecticut. M.A. Thesis. Department of Zoology, Connecticut College, New London, CT, USA.
Bibby, C. J. and J. Lunn. 1982. Conservation of reed beds and their avifauna in England and Wales. Biological Conservation 23:167–186.
Bontje, M. P. 1987. The application of science and engineering to restore a salt marsh. p. 16–23.In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference on Wetlands Restoration and Creation. Hillsborough Community College. Tampa, FL, USA.
Brawley, H. 1994. Birds of the Connecticut River estuary: Relating patterns of use to environmental conditions. Report to The Nature Conservancy, Connecticut Chapter. Conservation Biology Research Program, Middletown, CT, USA.
Brawley, H. 1994. Birds of Counecticut’s tidal wetlands: Relating patterns of use to environmental conditions. M.A. Thesis. Connecticut College, New London, CT, USA.
Brawley, A. H., R. S. Warren, and R. A. Askins. 1998. Bird use of restoration and reference marshes within the Barn Island Wildlife Management Area. CT, USA. Environmental Management 22: 625–633.
Brower, J. E. and J. H. Zar. 1977. Field and Laboratory Methods for General Ecology. Wm. C. Brown & Co., Dubuque, IA, USA.
Brown, M. and J. J. Dinsmore. 1986. Implications of marsh size and isolation for marsh bird management. Journal of Wildlife Management 50:392–397.
Buchsbaum, R. and M. Hall. 1991. An inventory of the biota of Belle Isle Marsh in a tidally restricted area. Report to the Massachuseets Environmental Trust. Boston, MA, USA.
Buck, E. L. 1995. Selected environmental factors and the spread ofPhragmites australis (Common Reed) in the tidelands of the lower Connecticut River. M.A. Thesis. Department of Zoology, Connecticut College, New London, CT, USA.
Burger, J. 1985. Habitat selection in temperate marsh-nesting birds. p. 253–281.In M. L. Cody, (ed.) Habitat Selection in Birds. Academic Press, New York, NY, USA.
Burger, J. and J. Shisler. 1978. Nest-site selection of Willets in a New Jersey salt marsh. Wilson Bulletin 90:599–607.
Burger, J., J. K. Shisler, and F. H. Lesser. 1982. Avian utilisation on six salt marshes in New Jersey. Biological Conservation 23:187–212.
Capotosto, P. 1996.Phragmites control on the lower Connecticut River. Abstracts for Tidelands of the Connecticut River Symposium. Connecticut River Watershed Council, The Nature Conservancy, and Wesleyan University, Middletown, CT, USA.
Clarke, J., B. A. Harrington, T. Hruby, and F. E. Wasserman. 1984. The effects of ditching for mosquito control on salt marsh use by birds in Rowley, Massachusetts. Journal of Field Ornithology 55: 160–180.
Connor, F. and E. D. McCoy. 1979. The statistics and biology of the species-area relationship. American Naturalist 113:791–833.
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. 1995. Connecticut’s endangered, threatened and special concern species. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Hartford, CT, USA.
Craig, R. J. 1990. Historic trends in the distribution and populations of estuarine marsh birds of the Connecticut River. Department of Natural Resources, Management and Engineer Research Report 83, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA.
Craig, R. J. and K. G. Beal. 1992. The influence of habitat variables on marsh bird communities of the Conneceticut River estuary. Wilson Bulletin 104:295–311.
Daiber, F. C. 1982. Animals of the Tidal Marsh. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York, NY, USA.
Errington, P. L. 1963. Muskrat Populations. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA, USA.
Fell, P. E., S. P. Weissbach, D. A. Jones, M. A. Fallon, J. A. Zeppieri, E. K. Faison, K. A. Lenmon, K. J. Newberry, and L. K. Reddington. 1998. Does invasion of oligohaline tidal marshes by reed grass,Phragmites australis, (Cav) Trin. ex Steud., affect the availability of prey resources for the mummiehog,Fundulus heteroclitus L.? Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 222:59–77.
Greenlaw, J. S. 1983. Microgeographic distribution of breeding Seaslide Sparrows on New York salt marshes. p. 99–114.In T. L. Quay, J. B. Funderburg, D. S. Lee, E. F. Potter, and C. S. Robbins (eds.) The Seaside Sparrow Its Biology and Management. North Caroline Biological Survey, Raleigh, NC, USA.
Harris, H. J., M. S. Milligan, and G. A. Fewless. 1983. Diversity: Quantification and ecological evaluation in freshwater marshes. Biological Conservation 27:99–110.
Herkert, J. R. 1994. The effect of habitat fragmentation on midwestern grassland bird communities. Ecological Applications 4: 461–471.
Holisova, V. 1975. The foods eaten by rodents in reed swamps of Nesyt fish pond. Zoologicke Listy 24:223–237.
Howe, M. A. 1982. Social organization in a nesting population of eastern Willets (Catoptrophorus semipalmatus). Auk 99:88–102.
Howe M. A. 1987. Wetlands and waterbird conservation. American Birds 41:208–209.
Hudec, K. and K. Stastny. 1978. Birds in the reedswamp ecosystem. p. 366–372.In D. Dykyjova and J. Kvet (eds.) Lond Littoral Ecosystems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
Jones, W. L. and W. C. Lehman. 1987.Phragmites control and revegetation following aerial applications of glyphosate in Delaware. p. 185–199.In W. R. Whitman and W. H. Meredith (eds.) Waterfowl and Wetlands Symposium. Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control. Dover, DE, USA.
Kantrud, H. A. 1986. Effects of vegetation manipulation on breeding waterfowl in prairie wetlands—a literature review. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, USA. Fish and Wildlife Technical Report 3.
Kiviat, E. 1987. Common reed (Phragmites australis). p. 22–30.In D. J. Decker and J. W. Enek (eds.) Exotic Plants with Identified Detrimental Impacts on Wildlife Habitats in New York State. Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, Ithaca, NY, USA. Natural Resources Research and Extension Series No. 29.
Lapin, B. and J. Randall. 1993.Phragmites australis (Phragmites communis). Element Stewardship Abstract, The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, USA.
Lynch, J. J., T. O’Neil, and D. W. Lay. 1947. Management significance of damage by geese and muskrats to Gulf Coast marshes. Journal of Wildlife Management 11:50–76.
MacArthur, R. H. and J. W. MacArthur. 1961. On bird species diversity. Ecology 42:594–598.
Marshall, R. M. and S. E. Reinert. 1990. Breeding ecology of Seaside Sparrows in a Massachusetts salt marsh. Wilson Bulletin 102: 501–513.
Miller, W. R. and F. F. Egler. 1950. Vegetation of the Wequetequock-Pawcatuck tidal-marshes. Ecological Monographs 20:143–172.
Moller, H. S. 1975. Danish salt-marsh communities of breeding birds in relation to different types of management. Ornis Scandinavia 6:125–133.
Niering, W. A. and R. S. Warren. 1980. Vegetation patterns and processes in New England salt marshes. BioScience 30:301–307.
Post, W. 1974. Functional analysis of space-related behavior in the Seaside Sparrow. Ecology 55:564–574.
Rafe, R. W., M. B. Usher, and R. G. Jefferson. 1985. Birds on reserves: The influence of area and habitat on species richness. Journal of Applied Ecology 22:327–335.
Reinert, S. E., F. C. Golet, and W. R. DeRagon. 1981. Avian use of ditched and unditched salt marshes in southeastern New England: a preliminary report. Transactions of the Northeastern Mosquito Control Association 27:1–23.
Reinert, S. E. and M. J. Mello. 1995. Avian community structure and habitat use in a southern New England estuary. Wetlands 15: 9–19.
Roman, C. T., W. A. Niering, and R. S. Warren. 1984. Salt marsh vegetation change in response to tidal restriction. Environmental Management 8:141–150.
Runkle, J. R. 1981. Gap regeneration in some old-growth forests of the eastern United States. Ecology 62:1041–1051.
Runkle, J. R. 1982. Patterns of disturbance in some old-growth mesic forests of eastern North America. Ecology 63:1533–1546.
Slavin, P. and J. K. Shisler. 1983. Avian utilisation of a tidally restored salt hay farm. Biological Coservation 26:271–285.
Smith, H. R. and P. A. Jordan. 1976. An exploited population of muskrats with unusual biomass, productivity and body size. State Gological and Natural History Survey of Connecticut. Hartford, CT, USA. Report of Investigations No. 7.
Stearns, L. A., D. Maccreary, and F. C. Daigh. 1940. Effect of ditching for mosquito control on the muskrat population of a Delware tidewater marsh. University of Delaware Agricultural Experiment Station, Nowark, DE, USA. Bulletin No. 225.
Tiner, R. W., Jr. 1984. Wetlands of the United States: current status and recent trends. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, Washington, DC, USA.
Vogl, R. J. 1973. Effects of fire on the plants and animals of a Florida wetland. American Midland Naturalist 89:334–347.
Vogt, W. 1938. Preliminary notes on the behavior and the ecology of the Eastern Willet. Proceedings of the Linnaean Society, N.Y. 49:8–42.
Ward, E. 1942.Phragmites management. Transactions of the North American Wildlife Conference 7:294–298.
Warren, R. S. 1994.Phragmites australis on the tidelands of the lower Connecticut River: Patterns of invasion and spread. Report to the Nature Conservancy Connecticut Chapter, Conservation Biology Research Program, Middletown, CT, USA.
Weller, M. W. and L. H. Frederickson. 1974. Avian ecology of a managed glacial marsh. Living Bird 12:269–291.
Weller, M. W. and C. E. Spatcher. 1965. Role of habitat in the distribution and abundance of marsh birds. Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA. Special Report 43.
Woolfenden, G. E. 1956. Comparative breeding, behavior ofAmmospiza caudacuta andA. maritima. University of Kansas Publications, Museum of Natural History 10:45–75.
Zembal, R., B. W. Massey, and J. M. Fancher. 1989. Movements and activity patterns of the light-footed clapper rat. Journal of Wildlife Management 53:39–42.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Benoit, L.K., Askins, R.A. Impact of the spread ofPhragmites on the distribution of birds in Connecticut tidal marshes. Wetlands 19, 194–208 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03161749
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03161749