Loading…
Water chestnut biomass estimates using density as a proxy: Facilitating multiyear comparisons with a streamlined approach
Water chestnut (Trapa natans) is an invasive macrophyte negatively impacting native aquatic communities in the United States. In New York state, water chestnut occurrence is monitored through iMapInvasives, a public database that includes several data fields for all records, such as distribution type...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of aquatic plant management 2023-01, Vol.61 (1), p.15-21 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | 21 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 15 |
container_title | Journal of aquatic plant management |
container_volume | 61 |
creator | Moore, Jacob O'Neall, Mitchell Lutz, Colleen Pearson, Steven |
description | Water chestnut (Trapa natans) is an invasive macrophyte negatively impacting native aquatic communities in the United States. In New York state, water chestnut occurrence is monitored through iMapInvasives, a public database that includes several data fields for all records, such as distribution type (or categorical density). Biomass is not regularly recorded in iMapInvasives but is important as a secondary measurement to gauge primary production, nutrient uptake, and invasive impact. Lack of biomass data in iMapInvasives may be addressed with alternative methods of acquiring biomass information from records. The primary goal of this project was to develop methods that allow comparable biomass estimates to be made using a measured area and an observed distribution type in the iMapInvasives database. Nine locations were sampled for water chestnut in June and July 2021. Areas of sparse, dense, and monoculture growth were recorded along with trace points. Collected plants were cleaned, measured, and dried to obtain final dry biomass density values for each distribution type. Density values were highest in monocul-ture and lowest in sparse but also varied based on location and date. ANOVA testing indicated that plant density, rosette growth, and rosette width varied among distribution types. Our water chestnut measurements were used to create formulas that can estimate biomass using presence-and distribution-type data in iMapInvasives. These formulas may be useful for stakeholders and managers seeking to understand the invasive impact of water chestnut and assess its change in abundance over time. |
doi_str_mv | 10.57257/JAPM-D-22-00007 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3037401610</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A752778054</galeid><sourcerecordid>A752778054</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c193t-60036a20696024d7acd2db1858759968ede7886152c8272d6f7d507cbf2497f73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotUU1PwzAMzQEkxuDOMRLnjiRtkpbbtDE-NAQHEMcoS9ItU9uUJBX035Nt2AfL9nu27AfADUYzygnldy_z99dsmRGSoWT8DEwQLljGGMkvwGUIe4RoVRE2AeOXjMZDtTMhdkOEG-taGQJMqW1TK8Ah2G4LtemCjSOUAUrYe_c73sOVVLaxUcYDoB2aaEcj0yzX9tLb4LoAf2zcJUKI3si2sZ3RUPaJLtXuCpzXsgnm-j9Owefq4WPxlK3fHp8X83WmcJXHjCGUM0kQqxgiheZSaaI3uKQlTyew0mjDy5JhSlRJONGs5poirjY1KSpe83wKbk9z09rvId0l9m7wXVopcpTzAmGGUULNTqitbIywXe2ilyq5Nq1VrjO1TfU5p4TzEtEiEdCJoLwLwZta9D59zI8CI3FUQRxUEEtBiDiqkP8BCFx9_w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3037401610</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Water chestnut biomass estimates using density as a proxy: Facilitating multiyear comparisons with a streamlined approach</title><source>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</source><creator>Moore, Jacob ; O'Neall, Mitchell ; Lutz, Colleen ; Pearson, Steven</creator><creatorcontrib>Moore, Jacob ; O'Neall, Mitchell ; Lutz, Colleen ; Pearson, Steven</creatorcontrib><description>Water chestnut (Trapa natans) is an invasive macrophyte negatively impacting native aquatic communities in the United States. In New York state, water chestnut occurrence is monitored through iMapInvasives, a public database that includes several data fields for all records, such as distribution type (or categorical density). Biomass is not regularly recorded in iMapInvasives but is important as a secondary measurement to gauge primary production, nutrient uptake, and invasive impact. Lack of biomass data in iMapInvasives may be addressed with alternative methods of acquiring biomass information from records. The primary goal of this project was to develop methods that allow comparable biomass estimates to be made using a measured area and an observed distribution type in the iMapInvasives database. Nine locations were sampled for water chestnut in June and July 2021. Areas of sparse, dense, and monoculture growth were recorded along with trace points. Collected plants were cleaned, measured, and dried to obtain final dry biomass density values for each distribution type. Density values were highest in monocul-ture and lowest in sparse but also varied based on location and date. ANOVA testing indicated that plant density, rosette growth, and rosette width varied among distribution types. Our water chestnut measurements were used to create formulas that can estimate biomass using presence-and distribution-type data in iMapInvasives. These formulas may be useful for stakeholders and managers seeking to understand the invasive impact of water chestnut and assess its change in abundance over time.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0146-6623</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.57257/JAPM-D-22-00007</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Gainesville: Aquatic Plant Management Society</publisher><subject>Analysis ; Aquatic communities ; Aquatic plants ; Biomass ; Estimates ; Geospatial data ; Monoculture ; Nonnative species ; Nutrient uptake ; Planting density ; Primary production ; Rosette ; Seeds ; Spatial data ; Trapa natans ; Variance analysis ; Water</subject><ispartof>Journal of aquatic plant management, 2023-01, Vol.61 (1), p.15-21</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2023 Aquatic Plant Management Society</rights><rights>2023. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/3037401610?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,25752,27923,27924,37011,44589</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Moore, Jacob</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Neall, Mitchell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lutz, Colleen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearson, Steven</creatorcontrib><title>Water chestnut biomass estimates using density as a proxy: Facilitating multiyear comparisons with a streamlined approach</title><title>Journal of aquatic plant management</title><description>Water chestnut (Trapa natans) is an invasive macrophyte negatively impacting native aquatic communities in the United States. In New York state, water chestnut occurrence is monitored through iMapInvasives, a public database that includes several data fields for all records, such as distribution type (or categorical density). Biomass is not regularly recorded in iMapInvasives but is important as a secondary measurement to gauge primary production, nutrient uptake, and invasive impact. Lack of biomass data in iMapInvasives may be addressed with alternative methods of acquiring biomass information from records. The primary goal of this project was to develop methods that allow comparable biomass estimates to be made using a measured area and an observed distribution type in the iMapInvasives database. Nine locations were sampled for water chestnut in June and July 2021. Areas of sparse, dense, and monoculture growth were recorded along with trace points. Collected plants were cleaned, measured, and dried to obtain final dry biomass density values for each distribution type. Density values were highest in monocul-ture and lowest in sparse but also varied based on location and date. ANOVA testing indicated that plant density, rosette growth, and rosette width varied among distribution types. Our water chestnut measurements were used to create formulas that can estimate biomass using presence-and distribution-type data in iMapInvasives. These formulas may be useful for stakeholders and managers seeking to understand the invasive impact of water chestnut and assess its change in abundance over time.</description><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Aquatic communities</subject><subject>Aquatic plants</subject><subject>Biomass</subject><subject>Estimates</subject><subject>Geospatial data</subject><subject>Monoculture</subject><subject>Nonnative species</subject><subject>Nutrient uptake</subject><subject>Planting density</subject><subject>Primary production</subject><subject>Rosette</subject><subject>Seeds</subject><subject>Spatial data</subject><subject>Trapa natans</subject><subject>Variance analysis</subject><subject>Water</subject><issn>0146-6623</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNotUU1PwzAMzQEkxuDOMRLnjiRtkpbbtDE-NAQHEMcoS9ItU9uUJBX035Nt2AfL9nu27AfADUYzygnldy_z99dsmRGSoWT8DEwQLljGGMkvwGUIe4RoVRE2AeOXjMZDtTMhdkOEG-taGQJMqW1TK8Ah2G4LtemCjSOUAUrYe_c73sOVVLaxUcYDoB2aaEcj0yzX9tLb4LoAf2zcJUKI3si2sZ3RUPaJLtXuCpzXsgnm-j9Owefq4WPxlK3fHp8X83WmcJXHjCGUM0kQqxgiheZSaaI3uKQlTyew0mjDy5JhSlRJONGs5poirjY1KSpe83wKbk9z09rvId0l9m7wXVopcpTzAmGGUULNTqitbIywXe2ilyq5Nq1VrjO1TfU5p4TzEtEiEdCJoLwLwZta9D59zI8CI3FUQRxUEEtBiDiqkP8BCFx9_w</recordid><startdate>20230101</startdate><enddate>20230101</enddate><creator>Moore, Jacob</creator><creator>O'Neall, Mitchell</creator><creator>Lutz, Colleen</creator><creator>Pearson, Steven</creator><general>Aquatic Plant Management Society</general><general>Aquatic Plant Management Society, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230101</creationdate><title>Water chestnut biomass estimates using density as a proxy: Facilitating multiyear comparisons with a streamlined approach</title><author>Moore, Jacob ; O'Neall, Mitchell ; Lutz, Colleen ; Pearson, Steven</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c193t-60036a20696024d7acd2db1858759968ede7886152c8272d6f7d507cbf2497f73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Aquatic communities</topic><topic>Aquatic plants</topic><topic>Biomass</topic><topic>Estimates</topic><topic>Geospatial data</topic><topic>Monoculture</topic><topic>Nonnative species</topic><topic>Nutrient uptake</topic><topic>Planting density</topic><topic>Primary production</topic><topic>Rosette</topic><topic>Seeds</topic><topic>Spatial data</topic><topic>Trapa natans</topic><topic>Variance analysis</topic><topic>Water</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Moore, Jacob</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Neall, Mitchell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lutz, Colleen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearson, Steven</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Journal of aquatic plant management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Moore, Jacob</au><au>O'Neall, Mitchell</au><au>Lutz, Colleen</au><au>Pearson, Steven</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Water chestnut biomass estimates using density as a proxy: Facilitating multiyear comparisons with a streamlined approach</atitle><jtitle>Journal of aquatic plant management</jtitle><date>2023-01-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>61</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>15</spage><epage>21</epage><pages>15-21</pages><issn>0146-6623</issn><abstract>Water chestnut (Trapa natans) is an invasive macrophyte negatively impacting native aquatic communities in the United States. In New York state, water chestnut occurrence is monitored through iMapInvasives, a public database that includes several data fields for all records, such as distribution type (or categorical density). Biomass is not regularly recorded in iMapInvasives but is important as a secondary measurement to gauge primary production, nutrient uptake, and invasive impact. Lack of biomass data in iMapInvasives may be addressed with alternative methods of acquiring biomass information from records. The primary goal of this project was to develop methods that allow comparable biomass estimates to be made using a measured area and an observed distribution type in the iMapInvasives database. Nine locations were sampled for water chestnut in June and July 2021. Areas of sparse, dense, and monoculture growth were recorded along with trace points. Collected plants were cleaned, measured, and dried to obtain final dry biomass density values for each distribution type. Density values were highest in monocul-ture and lowest in sparse but also varied based on location and date. ANOVA testing indicated that plant density, rosette growth, and rosette width varied among distribution types. Our water chestnut measurements were used to create formulas that can estimate biomass using presence-and distribution-type data in iMapInvasives. These formulas may be useful for stakeholders and managers seeking to understand the invasive impact of water chestnut and assess its change in abundance over time.</abstract><cop>Gainesville</cop><pub>Aquatic Plant Management Society</pub><doi>10.57257/JAPM-D-22-00007</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0146-6623 |
ispartof | Journal of aquatic plant management, 2023-01, Vol.61 (1), p.15-21 |
issn | 0146-6623 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_3037401610 |
source | Publicly Available Content (ProQuest) |
subjects | Analysis Aquatic communities Aquatic plants Biomass Estimates Geospatial data Monoculture Nonnative species Nutrient uptake Planting density Primary production Rosette Seeds Spatial data Trapa natans Variance analysis Water |
title | Water chestnut biomass estimates using density as a proxy: Facilitating multiyear comparisons with a streamlined approach |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T19%3A53%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Water%20chestnut%20biomass%20estimates%20using%20density%20as%20a%20proxy:%20Facilitating%20multiyear%20comparisons%20with%20a%20streamlined%20approach&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20aquatic%20plant%20management&rft.au=Moore,%20Jacob&rft.date=2023-01-01&rft.volume=61&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=15&rft.epage=21&rft.pages=15-21&rft.issn=0146-6623&rft_id=info:doi/10.57257/JAPM-D-22-00007&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA752778054%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c193t-60036a20696024d7acd2db1858759968ede7886152c8272d6f7d507cbf2497f73%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3037401610&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A752778054&rfr_iscdi=true |