in San Francisco Bay Wetlands€¦ · in San Francisco Bay Wetlands Kerstin Kalchmayr San Francisco...

Assessing Spatio-temporal Changes of Invasive Limonium ramosissimum in San Francisco Bay Wetlands

Kerstin Kalchmayr

San Francisco State University

Department of Geography & Environment

***

Thesis committee: Dr. Barbara Holzman,

Dr. Ellen Hines and Dr. Kathy Boyer*

*Dept. of Biology SFSU

Invasive Limonium ramosissimum

Introduction Methods Results/Discussion Summary/Conclusion Acknowledgements

Limonium ramosissimum (Poir.) Maire▪ Algerian sea lavender

▪ Family: Plumbaginaceae

▪ Origin: Western Mediterranean

▪ Discovered in SF Bay: 2007

CalFlora.org/Margo Bors


Seal Slough, SF Bay July 2015

InvasiveLimoniumramosissimum

NativeLimonium californicum

LIRA’s Potential Impacts

California Ridgway’s rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus)

LIRA ‘mat’ formation at Sanchez Creek Marsh, SF Bay July 2015

Salt marsh harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris)


SF Bay LIRA research


▪ 20 locations: 15,000m2

▪ Disturbed, upper marsh

▪ Prolific seed producer

▪ Co occurring native halophyte cover decreased

▪ Seeds tolerate high salinities

▪ Germinates faster than natives

▪ Reduced soil salinity and moisture

(Cleave 2012; Archbald and Boyer 2014a; 2014b)

▪ Temporal processes: modulate impacts of invading sp. (Strayer et al. 2006)

▪ Lack of studies: multiple time scales since invasion (Hendersen et al. 2006; Strayer et al. 2006)

▪ Long-term studies useful for management decisions (Blossey 1999; Robison 2009; )


Research Objectives▪ Assess changes in abundance and

distribution of LIRA populations throughout the Bay-Area.

▪ Assess changes to native species composition and soil properties.


▪ Field methods of Archbald (2011) followed

Current study is two-fold:

1) Bay-wide mapping of LIRA populations

2) Mensurate surveys at established study sites to determine changes:

-native species composition

-soil properties


Bay-wide mapping

Fig. 1: Size and location of LIRA populations growing at the 20 saltmarsh sites identified in 2008-2010. (Data courtesy G. Archbald)


Mensurate surveys

Fig 2. Archbald (2011) study sites (From Archbald 2011)


Mensurate surveys▪ 30 1-m2 survey plots at each site established 2008

‘IN LIRA’ PLOTS

n=15

‘OUT LIRA’ PLOTS

n=15

(Archbald and Boyer 2014a)

Survey plot (n = 5)

Fig 3: Survey plot schematic


Mensurate surveys: Vegetation Surveys

▪ Vegetation surveys:-August 2015-March 2016

▪ Record species present in every other cell*

(LIRA, natives: JACA, DISP, SAPA)

1-m2 sampling quad with 100 cell grid

*change in vegetation survey


Mensurate surveys: Soil Analysis

▪ Soil properties analyzed:

1. Soil moisture

2. Bulk density

3. Soil salinity

4. Soil organic matter (SOM)

Collecting soil samples with the soil corer


Statistical analysis: (alpha <0.05)

Vegetation:▪ ANOVAs analyze percent cover data▪ Friedman test (non-parametric 1-way ANOVA)▪ 3-way ANOVA and 2-way mixed ANOVA = bootstrapped

(10,000 iterations)▪ Paired t-tests

Soil:▪ 3-way ANOVA (2015 data only)▪ 2-way and 3-way mixed ANOVAs


Bay-wide mapping

Fig 4: Total LIRA population size from the two study periods 2008-2010 and 2015.


0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

Year 2008-2010 Year 2015

Are

a (m

2)

15,110 m2

32, 002 m2

Fig. 7: Map with current known locations of LIRA (2016) in the San Francisco Bay Area. (Showing LIRA presence only)

Mensurate surveys: LIRA

Fig. 9: LIRA change in percent cover from August 2008 to August 2015

Error bars represent 1 S.E. and n=30 for each graph.

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

LO ME HIC

ove

r (%

) ch

ange

LIRA - Coyote Point

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

LO ME HI

Co

ver

(%)

chan

ge

LIRA - Sanchez Creek Marsh


IN OUT

Mensurate surveys: JACA

Fig. 10: JACA change in percent cover from August 2008 to August 2015


-70

-50

-30

-10

10

30

50

LO ME HI

Co

ver

(%)

chan

ge

JACA - Sanchez Creek Marsh

-70

-50

-30

-10

10

30

50

LO ME HI

Co

ver

(%)

chan

ge

JACA - Coyote Point


IN OUT

Mensurate surveys: DISP

Fig. 11: DISP change in percent cover from August 2008 to August 2015


-70

-50

-30

-10

10

30

50

LO ME HI

Co

ver

(%)

chan

ge

DISP - Sanchez Creek Marsh

-70

-50

-30

-10

10

30

50

LO ME HIC

ove

r (%

) ch

ange

DISP - Coyote Point


IN OUT

Mensurate surveys: SAPA

Fig. 12: SAPA change in percent cover from August 2008 to August 2015


-70

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

LO ME HI

Co

ver

(%)

chan

ge

SAPA - Sanchez Creek Marsh

-70

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

LO ME HI

Co

ver

(%)

chan

ge

SAPA - Coyote Point


IN OUT

}}

Mensurate surveys: Soil Surveys

▪ Salinity (ppt)

▪ Soil moisture (%)

▪ Bulk density (g/cm3)

▪ Soil organic matter (%) (SOM)


Fig. 13: Salinity from 9/2008 and 9/2015. Error bars represent 1 S.E. and n=30 for all graphs.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

LO ME HI

Salin

ity

(pp

t)

Sanchez Marsh (2008)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

LO ME HI

Salin

ity

(pp

t)

Coyote Point (2008)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

LO ME HI

Salin

ity

(pp

t)


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

LO ME HI

Salin

ity

(pp

t)

Coyote Point (2015)

Salinity


IN OUT

Fig. 14: Soil % moisture from 9/2008 and 9/2015. Error bars represent 1 S.E. and n=30 for all graphs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

LO ME HI

Mo

istu

re (

%)


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

LO ME HI

Mo

istu

re (

%)

Coyote Point (2008)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

LO ME HI

Mo

istu

re (

%)


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

LO ME HI

Mo

istu

re (

%)

Coyote Point (2015)

Soil moisture


IN OUT

Fig. 15: Bulk density (g/cm3) from 9/2008 and 9/2015. Error bars represent 1 S.E. and n=30 for all graphs

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

LO ME HI

Bu

lk d

en

sity

(g/

cm3

)


0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

LO ME HI

Bu

lk d

en

sity

(g/

cm3

)

Coyote Point (2008)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

LO ME HI

Bu

lk d

en

sity

(g/

cm3

)


0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

LO ME HI

Bu

lk d

ensi

ty (

g/cm

3)

Coyote Point (2015)

Bulk density


IN OUT

Soil Organic Matter (SOM)

Fig. 16: Soil organic matter (%) from 9/2015. Error bars represent 1 S.E. and n=30 for all graphs

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

LO ME HI

% s

oil

org

anic

mat

ter

Sanchez Creek (2015)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

LO ME HI

% s

oil

org

anic

mat

ter

Coyote Point (2015)


IN OUT

▪ LIRA rapidly expanding throughout the Bay Area

▪ All species: LIRA and natives decreased. Drought affected all species

▪ BUT LIRA better adapted to drought.

▪ SAPA, DISP most affected by LIRA and drought

▪ Longer term impacts to bulk density and SOM


▪ LIRA: hardy, drought tolerant species

▪ Marsh level: dominant player

▪ Long-term competitive ability in Bay-Area wetlands


Recommendations▪ Reinvigorate

removal efforts▪ Research on seed

bank dynamics (seed viability)

▪ Thesis committee!▪ Gavin Archbald▪ Foster City, City of Burlingame and San Mateo Co. Parks▪ Invasive Spartina Project: Whitney Thornton and Drew Kerr▪ Judy Stalker (Marin Audubon Board)▪ Dr. Ed Connor (statistical analysis)▪ Dr. Jerry Davis (plot elevations)▪ Department of Geography & Environment▪ Pease Memorial Scholarship Award▪ Boyer lab at Romberg Tiburon Center▪ COSE travel grant▪ Family and Friends: Anthony Copioli, Darren Blackburn,

Laura Branagan and Melissa Kent for field and lab assistance


References:• Ailstock SM, Norman MC, and Bushmann PJ (2001). Common reed Phragmites australis Control and Effects Upon Biodiversity in Freshwater Nontidal

Wetlands. Restoration Ecology. 9: 1. doi:10.1046/j.1526-100x.2001.009001049.x.• Asher J, Dewey S (2005). Estimated annual rates of weed spread on western federal wildlands. Draft white paper. Federal Interagency Committee for

Management of Noxious and Exotic Weeds. (FICMNEW). Washington, D.C.• Archbald G (2011). Predicting the spread of Limonium ramosissimum in San Francisco Bay Marshes. Masters Thesis. Department of Biology: Ecology and

Systematic Biology. San Francisco State University. California. USA.• Archbald G, Boyer KE (2014a). Distribution and invasion potential of Limonium ramosissimum Subsp. Provinciale in San Francisco estuary salt marshes. San

Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science. 12: 2• Archbald G, Boyer KE (2014b). Potential for spread of Algerian Sea Lavender (Limonium ramosissimum Subsp. Provinciale) in tidal marshes. Invasive Plant

Science and Management. 7: 3. doi:10.1614/IPSM-D-13-00091.1• Baker HG (1953). Dimorphism and Monomorphism in the Plumbaginaceae II. Pollen and Stigmata in the Genus Limonium. Annals in Botany 17 (67): 433–

45• Baldwin BG, Goldman D, Keil DJ, Patterson R, Rosatti TJ, Wilken D. (2012). The Jepson manual: vascular plants of California. Second Edition. Berkeley,

California: University of California Press.• Baye PR (2008). Vegetation management in terrestrial edges of tidal marshes, western San Francisco Estuary, California: Integrated vegetation

management strategies and practical guidelines for local stewardship programs. Prepared for Marin Audubon Society, Mill Valley, California. 35p.• Blossey B (1999). Before, during and after: The need for long-term monitoring in Invasive Plant Species Management. Biological Invasions. 1:

doi:10.1023/A:1010084724526.• Branton M, Richardson JS (2011). Assessing the value of umbrella-species concept for conservation planning with meta-analysis. Conservation Biology.

25:1. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01606.x.• Callaway JC, Parker VT, Vasey MC, Schile LM, Herbert ER (2011). Tidal wetland restoration in San Francisco Bay: History and current issues. San Francisco

Estuary and Watershed Science. http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5dd3n9x3.pdf• Cleave A (2012). Limonium ramosissimum effects on native salt marsh communities in a changing environment. Masters thesis. Department of Biology:

Conservation Biology. San Francisco State University. California. USA.• Cloern JE, Jassby AD (2012). Drivers of change in estuarine-coastal ecosystems: Discoveries from four decades of study in San Francisco Bay. Reviews in

Geophysics. 50. 1-33.• Daehler CC (2003). Performance comparisons of co-occurring native and alien invasive plants: Implications for conservation and restoration. Annual

review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics. 34 (1) doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132403• Daehler CC, Strong C (1997). Hybridization between Introduced Smooth Cordgrass (Spartina Alterniflora; Poaceae) and Native California Cordgrass (S.

Foliosa) in San Francisco Bay, California, USA. American Journal of Botany 84(5). 607-11 http://www.amjbot.org/content/84/5/607.short• Devillers-Terschuren P, Devillers-Terschuren J (2001) Convention of the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats. Group of Experts for the

setting up of the Emerald Network of Areas of Special Conservation Interest. Application and Development of the Palaearctic habitat classification in the Course of Setting Up the Emerald Project - Malta. Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France. 70 p

• Goals Project (1999). Baylands ecosystem habitat goals. A report of habitat recommendations prepared by the San Francisco Bay Area Wetlands Ecosystem Goals Project. San Francisco (CA): U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Oakland (CA): San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board.

• Goals Project (2015). The Baylands and Climate Change: What We Can Do. Baylands Ecosystem Habitat Goals Science Update 2015 prepared by the San Francisco Bay Area Wetlands Ecosystem Goals Project. California State Coastal Conservancy, Oakland, CA.

http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5dd3n9x3.pdf

http://www.amjbot.org/content/84/5/607.short


Bay-wide mapping

-50 450 950 1450 1950 2450 2950 3450

Outside Pond R1

Greco Island

Bird Island

N. Coyote Pt.

Candlestick Pt. State Park

Beach Park

Albany Bulb

Sausalito

Coyote Pt.

SFO

Oyster Pt Marina

Whales Tail S.

Corte Madera

Pier 94

Coyote Creek lagoon

Seal Slough

Sanchez Creek Marsh

Yosemite Slough

Ideal Marsh S.

Plummer Creek Marsh

Nat

ive

mar

sh e

dge

Bea

chFi

lled

mar

sh e

dge

Res

tore

d m

arsh

Change in area (m2)

-10m2

-0.9 m2

+30m2

+3m2

Fig. 6: Change in area of Bay-wide LIRA popn between two studies

Mensurate surveys: Vegetation

Fig. 8a: IN plots: LIRA and native species JACA, DISP and SAPA mean percent cover change over time

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

LIRA JACA DISP SAPA

me

an %

co

ver

All marshes 'IN' plots (n=37)March 2008

August 2008

March 2009

August 2015

March 2016

}


}

Mensurate surveys: Vegetation

Fig. 8b: OUT plots: LIRA and native species JACA, DISP and SAPA mean percent cover change over time

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

LIRA JACA DISP SAPA

me

an %

co

ver

All marshes 'OUT' plots (n=40)March 2008

August 2008

March 2009

August 2015

March 2016


}

}

in San Francisco Bay Wetlands€¦ · in San Francisco Bay Wetlands Kerstin Kalchmayr San Francisco...

Documents

Transcript of in San Francisco Bay Wetlands€¦ · in San Francisco Bay Wetlands Kerstin Kalchmayr San Francisco...