• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Results
 Discussion
 Literature cited
 Appendix A. Summary data for experimental...






Title: Studies of a method of wetland reconstruction following phosphate mining
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00016640/00001
 Material Information
Title: Studies of a method of wetland reconstruction following phosphate mining
Physical Description: vi, 76 p. : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Brown, Mark T.
Florida Institute of Phosphate Research.
Gross, F.
Higman, J.
Publisher: Florida Institute of Phosphate Research
Phelps Laboratory, Center for Wetlands, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 1985.
 Subjects
Subject: Phosphate mines and mining -- Florida.
Wetland conservation -- Florida.
Reclamation of land -- Florida.
Wetlands -- Florida.
 Notes
General Note: "September 1985."
General Note: Bibliography: p. 53.
Funding: (Florida Environments Online)
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00016640
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 002384345
notis - AAA9237
notis - ALY9161
oclc - 16572818

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Page A-24
    Abstract
        Page A-25
    Introduction
        Page A-26
        Page A-27
    Methods
        Page A-28
        Page A-29
    Results
        Page A-30
        Page A-31
        Page A-32
        Page A-33
        Page A-34
        Page A-35
        Page A-36
        Page A-37
        Page A-38
        Page A-39
    Discussion
        Page A-40
    Results
        Page B-15
        Page B-16
        Page B-17
        Page B-18
        Page B-19
        Page B-20
        Page B-21
        Page B-22
        Page B-23
        Page B-24
        Page B-25
        Page B-26
        Page B-27
        Page B-28
        Page B-29
        Page B-30
        Page B-31
        Page B-32
        Page B-33
        Page B-34
        Page B-35
        Page B-36
        Page B-37
        Page B-38
        Page B-39
        Page B-40
        Page B-41
        Page B-42
        Page B-43
        Page B-44
        Page B-45
        Page B-46
        Page B-47
        Page B-48
    Discussion
        Page B-49
        Page B-50
        Page B-51
        Page B-52
    Literature cited
        Page B-53
        Page B-54
    Appendix A. Summary data for experimental sites
        Page B-55
        Page B-56
        Page B-57
        Page B-58
        Page B-59
        Page B-60
        Page B-61
        Page B-62
        Page B-63
        Page B-64
        Page B-65
        Page B-66
        Page B-67
        Page B-68
        Page B-69
        Page B-70
        Page B-71
        Page B-72
        Page B-73
        Page B-74
        Page B-75
        Page B-76
Full Text









STUDIES OF A METHOD OF WETLAND RECONSTRUCTION
FOLLOWING PHOSPHATE MINING*











Mark T. Brown, F. Gross and J. Higman




CENTER FOR WETLANDS
Phelps Laboratory
University of ;Florida,. ; .
Gainesville, florida -32611




















*Supported by funds from the Florida Institute of Phosphate Research.














ABSTRACT


A method of wetland reconstruction after phosphate mining involving
the "inoculation" of sites with peat from existing wetlands was tested.
One year's data were analyzed to determine the extent of wetland
regeneration on phosphate overburden soils after inoculation with
various thicknesses of peat material. Economic costs were compared
between two different methods of digging and transporting material to
the sites.
The germination and growth of wetland and transitional species on
the sites where peat was applied was far greater than on sites without
peat. Wetland and transitional species biomass exceeded 300 g/m2 on
one treatment while the mean was over 200 g/m2 for all treatment
plots. Where no peat;as appliedrafter one growing season, mo wetland
species 'ette esen tosdOrvve;. 'Percent cover by, al legetat-ion on the
peat'-treatment was~100< where peat was present and estimated as about
30% on the control.
Evaluation of the economic cost of this method of wetland
reconstruction indicates that the cost can vary considerably depending
on methods of digging and transporting the peat material to the site.
Costs for these trials were almost $12.00/m3 while the cost for
another trial where 6 acres of wetland were inoculated in central
Florida was approximately $5.00/m3.
In all, the preponderence of wetland species and their contribution
to total biomass on each of the experimental sites is strong evidence
that this method warrants serious consideration as a method of wetland
re-creation.








25
i~;..I.--: ;*i \














INTRODUCTION


A method of wetland reconstruction involving the application of
peat from a forested wetland that was to be mined to a reclamation area
was tested between September 1982 to January 1984. The research was
conducted at a site known as Block "8" of Occidental Chemical Company,
Reclamation project SR-8 near White Springs, Florida and was funded by
the Florida Institute of Phosphate Research (FIPR #83-03-022). Mining
of the reclamation site was completed in 1981 and recontouring was
completed just before September 1982.
The project design called for two different treatments of the
applied peat consisting of complete coverage in a uniform thickness and
of alternating strips of peat and bare ground. Detailed costs were
recorded to evaluiaatehe cost effectiveness.of this method of wetland
i< reconstruction iin addition, tree seedlingsq,were planted in the peat
material, andgrowth and survival were compared to seedlings at other
locations.

Description of Study Sites

Given in Figure 1 are the layout and pertinent data for the 10
experimental sites. .The long axis of each site runs in a north-south
direction with the lake's edge on the north. The first experimental
site to have peat applied was site 10, second was site 9, and then site
8, 7, 6, and finally site 3. Site 5 was the control where no peat was
applied. The order of application was to prove important later, as
the material applied to site 10 was from the perimeter of the donor
swamp and was far sandier than peat dug from the middle of the swamp.

Companion Project for Cost Comparison
In March 1983, a second project involving the reconstruction of
wetlands Ywas begun in central Florida. This project, near Fort Meade,
Florida, had a total of approximately 3.24 hectares (8 acres) of
wetlands that were nainoculated" with peat from a donor swamp. Typical


S 26

















RECLAIMED LAKE


- -SZ~i~ --


Layout of experimental sites. Stippled areas indicate where peat material was applied.
Numbers below plots indicate the average thickness of peat.


Figure 1.








wetlands in this area of central Florida are bayheads rather than the
cypress/gum swamps of north Florida: thus, comparisons between
vegetative structure were not made. However, different techniques of
digging and hauling peat material were employed, affording a cost
compare i son.

METHODS


Application of Peat
The peat material was applied to the experimental sites in late
November of 1982 after site contouring was completed. The peat was dug
from a donor swamp and transported to the experimental site using Cat
627 scrapper pans. In all, 64 scapper pan loads were applied to the
experimental sites. Measured depths of material (Shown in Figure 1)
suggested that the average volume per pan was approximately 13.8 cubic
meters.

Plant Population Structure

Twelve 1-m2,study plots were randomly located within each
experimental site, and quarterly censuses of plant populations were
taken. The census consisted of recording species and abundance of
individuals in each 1-m2 plot. The first census was conducted in
February 1983 (3 months after peat application), the second was
conducted in May 1983, the third was conducted in August 1983, and the
final census was conducted in October 1983.
Relative density, frequency, relative frequency, and importance
values were calculated for each study plot, and mean values for each
experimental site were determined. Statistical comparisons between
plots and sites were then conducted to test for differences in the
response of these variables to elevation, peat depth, and treatment
(complete coverage versus strip application).
To compare germination, growth, and survival of wetland species
versus upland species, a list of typical wetland plants, transitional
plants, and upland plants was compiled using the latest information from
the Department of Environmental Regulation (proposed Rule 17-4.02 (17)
and Rule 17-4.022, F.A.C.) and from Godfrey and Wooten (1979).


-: 28
* ' 1 -.. --' '









Biomass

The change in biomass over time and under differing conditions was
of importance. Biomass was determined without extensive destructive
sampling due to the limited area of each experimental site. After each
plant population census, the most abundant species were determined (in
all cases these species represented over 96% of individuals present and
an estimated 98% of total biomass), and 10 individuals of each species
on each experimental site were harvested, dried, and weighed. Selection
was carried out in the following manner: a line running north to south
was established randomly within each experimental site and a starting
point was randomly selected. From this starting point, the first 10
individuals of each species that came in contact with the line were
harvested.

Seedling Census

Three types of tree seedlings were planted in each experimental
site. Nyssa biflora seedlings were collected from a natural area and
Taxodium distichum and Liquidambar styraciflua were purchased from the
U.S.D.A. Division of Forest. Growth and survival rates of these
seedlings were compared to four seedling sites on Occidental's
reclamation areas, which had been planted in the last four years. Site
D of the four reclamation sites (A through 0) was planted roughly the
same time as seedlings on the experimental sites. This site was used
for direct comparison of survival and growth with the experimental
sites. Originally not less than 30 individuals were tagged and measured
for height at each site.

Water Level
Water level in the adjacent lake was monitored from January 1983 to
January 1984. In the early phases of the project, a Stevens water level
recorder was set up for a continuous recording of the lake water
fluctuations. Later in the year, as water levels stabilized, weekly
water levels were recorded.








Hydroperiod

The hydroperiod lengthh of time of inundation) for each of the
meter-squared plots was calculated using the elevation of each plot and
stage recordings, of the adjacent lake. Comparison with the number of
wetland, transitional and upland species from each plot were correlated
with hydroperiod.

Topographic Diversity

Elevations at all 12 study plots within each of the experimental
sites were determined and the standard deviations bf these elevations,
expressed in meters, were used as a measure of topographic diversity.
Overall plant diversity was calculated for each study site using
the Shannon Index (Shannon and Weaver, 1949) and was regressed on
topographic diversity to test whether biotic factors were closely
related to microhabitat variation at this early stage of ecosystem
development.

Economic Costs

Detailed records were kept for the 2 days of peat application to
the sites. The number of loads, estimates of volume per load,
'round-trip travel time, and hours of equipment operation were recorded
as the application progressed. The round-trip travel distance and total
dollar costs were also determined. Estimates of total volume of peat
applications were adjusted using the measurements of peat depth and area
of each experimental site.
A second evaluation of the economic costs of peat mulching was done
for comparative purposes using sites in Central Florida. Different
methods of digging, transporting, and spreading of the peat were
employed and afforded a good comparison of alternative techniques.

RESULTS

Plant Population Structure on Experimental Sites

Four detailed censuses of plant population structure were
performed over the year following peat application to the experimental
sites. Values for relative density, frequency, relative frequency and








importance value were calculated. Data from the six experimental sites
and the control site were summarized by species for the final census and
presented in Table 1.
Biomass

Biomass samples were taken the same day the population data were
taken. The February plant population census was taken three months
after peat application and before the growing season so plant biomass
was not substantial and biomass weights were not obtained. Thus only
three biomass samples were obtained over the year's time.
Five of the 16 species taken for biomass determination were
represented in each of the three sampling periods. These species were
Polygonum punctatum, Eupatorium capillifolium, Panicum spp., Sesbania
vesicaria, and Indigofera spp.
General trends of biomass production over time increased in upland
and wetland species as shown in Figure 2. This figure shows that
average wetland species biomass for all experimental sites was over
twice that of upland species.
Control site biomass weights were lower when compared to mean site
biomass for wetland species but showed an increase above the mean for
upland species. Figure 2 shows the trends over time for wetland and
upland biomass on the experimental sites.
Site 10 showed significantly lower upland and wetland biomass than
the other experimental sites with the exception of the final sampling
when upland biomass was far above the mean. The overall species
composition of this site was different from other sites probably due to
the differences in the peat that was applied. Peat for this site was
obtained from the perimeter of this donor site, and was sandier than
that obtained from more interior locations.

Differences in mean biomass between plots that received peat and
those that did not were evaluated with t-tests. Figure 3 shows the
relationships of total biomass between peat and non-peat plots. The
non-peat plots are all plots in the strip treatment experimental sites
that were not on the peat and the control plots. The differences
(assuning unequal variances) between total biomass on plots with peat
and without peat are significant to the 96% confidence level. The tests
for differences in submerged species biomass were significant at the





Growing Season, 19~j.


Total for Sites 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

Species NO RD FREQ RF IMP

Aeschynomene americana 45 0.73 0.24 4.30 2.52
Andropogon gerardi 4 0.06 0.02 0.43 0.25
Baccharis anqustifolia 7 0.11 0.07 1.29 0.70
Boehmeria cylindrica 2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
Cassia fasciculate 155 2.50 0.13 2.37 2.44
Cehalanthus occidentalis 2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
Coreopsis leavenworthii 4 0.06 0.01 0.22 0.14
Crotalaria spp. 2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
Cyperus haspan 6 0.10 0.04 0.65 0.37
Cyperus spp. 16 0.26 0.83 1.51 0.88
Digitaria sanguinalis 475 7.67 0.20 3.66 5.15
Dulichium arundinaceum 12 0.19 0.10 1.72 0.95
Eleocharis baldwinii 181 2.92 0.15 2.80 2.86
Eupatorium capillifolium 307 4.95 0.57 10.32 7.63
Heterotheca subexillaris 2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
Hydrocotyle umbellata 11 0.18 0.01 0.22 0.20
Hyptis alata 4 0.06 0.02 0.43 0.25
Indigofera hirsuta 3 0.05 0.04 0.65 0.35
Indigofera spp. 74 1.19 0.20 3.66 2.42
Juncus repens 40 0.65 0.07 1.29 0.97
Juncus spp. 2 0.03 0.01 0.22 0.13
Ludwigia spp. 152 2.45 0.06 1.08 1.76
Myrica cerifera 2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
Panicum bartowense 961 15.51 0.81 14.62 15.06
Panicum commutatum 35 0.56 0.11 1.94 1.23
Panicum dJchotomiflorum 295 4.76 0.45 8.17 6.46
Paspalum urvillei 744 12.01 0.45 7.31 9.66
Polygonum punctatum 2291 36.98 0.71 12.90 24.94
Quercus spp. 1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
Rhus spp. 1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
sagittaria lancifolis 3 0.05 0.01 0.22 0.14
Saururus cernuus 13 0.01 0.05 0.86 0.53
Scirpus californicus 67 1.08 0.19 3.44 2.26
Sesbania vesicaria 249 4.02 0.43 7.74 5.88
Smilax auriculata 10 0.16 0.10 1.72 0.94
Stylosanthes biflora 6 0.10 0.02 0.43 0.26
Unknowns 12 0.20 0.06 1.32 0.77

TOTAL 6196 100 100 100

NO Number of individuals

RD Relative density individuals of species x 100
total individuals of all species

FREO Frequefcv iumoer of points at which species occurs
total number of points sampled

RF Relative frequency frequency value for species x 100
total frequency value for all species
IMP Importance Value
Relative density plus relative frequency for species x 100










SITE 9

0


WETLAND
SPECIES
E UPLAND
SSPECES


SITE 8




//
//


1I


II2I


MAY MJ6 CT MAY mI OCT mIy M s OCT


SITE 10


SITE 5
CONTROL


I/
V//
f /A
/////
fl//V
fl /
fl 7
77 /
77 /
yZ /

fll
fJ

MyAYAU6OCT


MAY AUG 0T MAY iS OCT MAY AU OCT


Biomass of wetland and upland species on experimental plots and control at three intervals
during 1983.


SITE 8


SITE 7


2001-


SITE 3





j
s,


I501--


104-


Sol-


nL-


Fiqure 2.


= I I


1


4o0g


- I I-



















Plots with Peat,
N566


Plots without Peat,
J N=29




















SUBMERGED TRANSITIONAL UPLAND
SPECIES SPECIES SPECIES


Figure 3. Mean biomass of submerged transitional and upland species on
plots with peat and plots without peat at the end of the
growing season, 1983.









99.95 confidence level. There was no significant difference in
transitional or upland species biomass between peat and non-peat
plots.
Seedling Census

The only direct comparison of survival and growth rates between
seedlings planted on the experimental sites and seedlings planted on
normal overburden sites (Reclamation Sites A-D) was the comparison of
Taxodium distichum. The species was planted at roughly the same time on
both sites. Excluding experimental site 10, due to the upland nature of
the peat placed in the site, average survival rate on experimental sites
was 88.6% while survival rate on normal overburden soils was 80%.
Survival and growth rates of planted seedlings on experimental sites and
on normal overburden are summarized in Table 2.

Water Levels

Rainfall amounts monitored daily by Occidental Chemical Company
were typical for north-central Florida, though the summer rainfall made
up a smaller proportion of the total than was expected. During the
early stages of the project, January through April, total rainfall was
greater than usual. May and October were very dry.
Figure 4a is a histogram of daily rainfall during 1983. It is
apparent that most rainfall events were of limited quantity, with 29
events (46%) less than 0.5 cms, and 38 events (60%) less than 1 cm. The
soils at these sites are high in moisture-holding ability, and the
groundwater level was below the surface for nearly the entire year. In
the absence of direct groundwater connections or significant internal
runoff, these limited rainfall events only wet the soil for a day or two
at the most. Elevation of water table and mean site elevations were
compared and in spite of abundant rainfall, sites located above the
water table were dry most of the time, at least in the root zone.
Lake levels, weekly rainfall amounts, and mean site elevations are
plotted in Figure 4b.- While lake levels are controlled by Occidental,
they track rainfall amounts in a general manner during most of the year,
though major exceptions are found. Most prominent is the rapid and
extreme lowering of the lake level from April 13 to April 29. During















Table 2. Survival and growth rates of Seedlings planted on experimental sites and other reclamation
sites without application of peat. ..:,


.. Liquidambar
Nyssa biflora Taxodium distichum styraciflua
....' Total Total
% % X ...;- % % % Survival Growth
Site Survival Growth Survival: Growth Survival Growth Rate, % Rate, %


Experimental Sites


Reclamation Sites

A
B
C
D


*Negative growth rate due to extensive,
N e-/* ,-.- ',i '''*. r.*OS


100
86
722


10




io0
73
58
90
Mn .


100 20 100 19
73 21
58 8
90 15
TOuO 0 T7


I,


iLC, -.


'


;;


















(a)


60 +


DAILY RAINFALL (cm)


(b)


)-J


Figure 4. (a) Histogram of daily rainfall events. (b) Rainfall,
.adjacent lake water level, and average elevations of each of
the experimental sites.


:n


.~~.
.... ;
i:-
.c
..


. ; ', .< -1 "' .


--0


S-r.,~


Or


V 4 .`


.?.
~;

i.. 3.'
~~i.l









this period the level decreased from 37.06 m to 35.95 m, or 1.11 m.
This followed a substantial rainfall of 9.45 cms the previous week and
5.56 cms during the period when the lake level was lowered. Lake levels
remained low during most of summer and rose again to a peak of 36.84 m
on September 16. During autumn, rainfall amounts decreased and lake
levels were very low until the heavy rainfalls in early winter. The
lowering of lake levels for much of the growing season contributed to
very short hydroperiods for the experimental sites.

Hydroperiod

Hydroperiod, or the total number of days during the year when water
is at or above the soil surface, is a critical parameter -in the
establishment and differentiation of wetlands types. Approximate
hydroperiods have been suggested for different wetlands ecosystems in
Florida by Wharton et al. (1977) and Brown and Starnes (1983).
Hydroperiods range from 365 days a year for marshes to 100-150 days for
hydric hammocks.
The majority of the experimental plots had short hydroperiods with
74% having hydroperiods less than 30 days. A graph of the relationships
of hydroperiod to mean biomass is given in Figures 5a and 5b. In Figure
5a the number of upland transitional and wetland species is graphed
against hydroperiod for each experimental site. Total mean biomass of
upland transitional, and wetland species versus hydroperiod is graphed
in Figure 5b. Transitional species show an increasing biomass with
increasing hydroperiod. Other trends are unclear.

Topographic Diversity

Natural wetland ecosystems, whether young or mature, tend to have
small-scale topographic variation. In ecosystems with a fluctuating
water table close to the surface, this variation in topography may be of
great importance to microhabitat conditions and the development of
community plant diversity.
During the application of peat to the experimental sites, larae
equipment was used to deposit and spread the material. Some unevenness
of the applied peat resulted from the use of heavy equipment, adding to
the existing variation in terrain resulted from initial contouring.











A UPLANO SPECIES
* TRANSITIONAL SPECIES
* SUBMERGED SPECIES


I I I I I L I


Hydroperlod, days


A UPLANO
* TRANSITIONAL
* SUBMERGED


Hydroperlod In Experimental SItes, Days


2r-


10
0 *


,2 I I I I I I I I I I
0 02 04 .06 08 JO J2 J4 J6 18 20

Landscape Diversity


(a) Hydroperiod of experimental sites versus member of
upland, transitional, & wetland species. (b) Hydroper-iod
vs. biomass, and (c) Landscape diversity vs. plant diversity.


39


Figure 5.









In Figure 5C the relationship between topographic or landscape
diversity and plant diversity is qraphed. Plant diversity regressed on
topographic diversity showed a positive linear correlation (r = 0.79)
and was significant at the 90% level, using a t-test for population
correlation (Steel and Torrie 1980). Site 3 has the greatest divergence
fron the general pattern. This site is at the highest elevation
relative to water level and had peat applied in strips. These two
factors may explain the higher plant diversity because of the inclusion
of a larger number of upland species. Presence of peat was highly
significant at early sampling dates but became less significant as high
growth legumes took over the nonpeat areas.

Economic Costs

The cost of peat application for the Occidental reclamation area
and for a reclamation site in Central Florida are given in Figure
6. The differences in costs reflect different conditions and different
methods of digging and transporting the material from the donor swamps
to the reclamation site. At the Occidental sites, Cat 627 scrapper pans
were used to dig and transport the material, while at the Central
Florida site, a dragline was used to dig and 10-yard dump trucks were
used to transport the material. Generally the large variability in
costs suggest that small equipment may be more efficient than large
equipment.


DISCUSSION


The preponderance of wetland species and their contribution to the
total biomass on each of the experimental sites, especially when
compared with the control site where no peat was applied, is strong
evidence that this -ethod of peat inoculation warrants serious
consideration as a method of wetland re-creation. The sites were quite
rapidly colonized by herbaceous wetland species although no woody
species were sepn to germinate on the experimental sites in this first
year. The lower than anticipated water levels and the fact that the
sites were dry for long periods of the year affected the germination,
survival and growth of wetland species and their contribution to total
biomass on each of the experimental sites.















RESULTS



Vegetation Transects


Summary data for vegetation transects through two cypress/gum swamps that
had no recent disturbance are given in Tables A-1 and A-2 in the appendix. The
sites had been logged for pond cypress (Taxodium ascendens), however, within the
last decade and thus the population of this species within both swamps was lower
than that found in like ecosystems by Monk and Brown 1965, and Brown 1978. The
only evidence of logging was the number of stumps still present. Other signs of
disturbance such as open canopy and trampled shrub vegetation had been
repaired.

By far, the most important tree species (>10 cm dbh) was swamp blackgum
tupelo (Nyssa sylvatica) with pond cypress (Taxodium ascendens) the second most
important. The most prevalent sapling species (<10 cm dbh) was fetterbush
(Lyonia lucida). Other species present included sweetbay magnolia (Magnolia
virginiana), red maple (Acer rubrum), swampbay persea (Persea palustris),
summersweet clethra (Clethra alnifolia), and wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera) among
others.

Herbaceous vegetation was not included in these surveys since tree species
were the primary focus of the study.



Plant Population Structure on Experimental Sites


Four detailed censuses of the plant population structure were performed
over the year following peat application to the experimental sites. The data
from each census by experimental site and plot summaries of each census are pre-
sented in the appendix of this report (Tables A-3 through A-6). Values for rel-
ative density (number of individuals of a species per total number of all
individuals of all species times 100), frequency (number of plots on which
species occur per total number of plots), relative frequency (number of plots of
occurrence of a species per number of plots of occurrence of all species times
100), and species importance (relative density plus relative frequency converted
on a basis of 100% for all species) are given.

All plant species identified are listed in Table 3 by date of each plant
census. In the very early stages of germination, plants were difficult to
identify and few individuals had germinated. In the second census quite a few
species remained unidentifiable, but there were fewer and fewer unknowns as the
plants matured. In a few cases, plants were misidentified in the second or


1


I










Table 3. List of species found in all square-meter study plots.


Sampling Date
Species 2/04/83 5/05/83 8/09/83 10/21/83


Acer rubrum x -
Aeschynomene americana x x
Andropogon erardi x
Baccharis angustifolia x x x
oehmeria cylindrica x x

Cassia fasciculata x x
Cephalanthus occidentalis x x
Coreopsis leavenworthii x
Crotalaria spp. x
Cyperus haspan x

Cyperus spp. x x
Digitaria sanguinalis x
Dulichium arundinaceum x x x
Eleocharis baldwinii x x x x
Eriocaulon compressum x

Eupatorium capillifolium x x x
Eupatorium perfoliatum x
Heterotheca subaxlaris x
Hydrocotyle umbellata x x x x
Hyptis alata x

Indigofera hirsuta x
Indigofera spp. x x
Juncus acuminatus x
Juncus repens x x
Juncus spp. x

Lepidium virginicum -x -
Ludwigia spp. x x
Lyona lucida x
Myrica cerifera x
Panicum bartowense -- x

Panicum clandestinum x -
Panicum commutatum -- x
Panicumdichotomiflorum x
Panicum hemitomon x -
Panicum spp. x -

Panicum spp. #1 x
Panicum spp. #2 x






17


Table 3. (continued.)



Sampling Date
Species 2/04/83 5/05/83 8/09/83 10/21/83


Panicum spp. #3 x -
Paspalum urvillei x x x
Polygonum punctatum x x x x
Potamogeton spp. x -
Quercus spp. x x

Rhexia spp. x
Rhus spp. x
Rubus spp. x
Rubus trivialis x
Sagittaria lancifolia x x

Salix caroliniana x x
Saururus cernuus x x x
Scirpus californicus x x
Sesbania vesicaria x x
Smilax auriculata x x

Spartina bakerii x -
Styosanthes biflora x x
Unknown Al x -
Unknown A2 x -
Unknown A3 x -

Unknown A4 x -
Unknown A5 x -
Unknown A6 x -
Unknown A7 x -
Unknown A8 x -

Unknown A9 x -
Unknown A10 x -
Unknown All x -
Unknown A12 x -
Unknown A13 x -

Unknown B x
Unknown B2 x
Unknown B3 x
Unknown 84 x
Unknown 85 x










Table 3. (continued.)


Sampling Date

Species 2/04/83 5/05/83 8/09/83 10/21/83


Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown

Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown

Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown

Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown

Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown


86
composite
composite
composite
composite


grass 1
grass A
grass B
grass C
grass D


herb
herb
herb
herb
herb

herb
herb
herb
herb
herb

herb
herb
herb
herb
herb


Unknown legume x -
Unknown mint -x -
Unknown mushroom x
Vaccinium crassifolium x









third census, thus, in these instances, they were shown to be present in the
second or third census, but not in the fourth.

Germination Studies

Germination studies of peat samples from each experimental plot and wetland
transects run previous to the plot sampling were monitored during the course of
the project at the Center for Wetlands. Statistics for relative density, fre-
quency, relative frequency, and importance values were calculated for the germ-
ination study. Tables of germination tray data for three census periods are
given in the appendix as Tables A-7 through A-9.

Species composition in the germination trays was similar to that on the
experimental sites. In the first census, the dominant species (determined by
importance values), on both the experimental sites and the germination trays was
smart weed (Polygonum punctatum), while the most frequent species was spike rush
(Eleocharis baldwinii) in the germination trays and Polygonum on the
experimental sites.

Both the germination trays and the experimental sites had very low species
counts early in the year, increasing over time. By the August census, there
were 42 different species present on the experimental sites and 21 in the
germination trays. At this time Panicum (total of 3 species) and Polygonum were
the most important species in the germination trays, while Polygonum, Panicum (1
species) and Sesbania were the most important on the experimental sites. By
the end of the growing season, Polygonum and Panicum bartowense were clearly the
most abundant, important, and dominant species on the experimental sites (see
Tables A-6 and A-12 in the appendix).


Biomass


Biomass samples were taken the same day the population data were taken.
Three biomass samples were obtained over a year's time. Plants were not abund-
ant enough during the February sampling period for biomass to be measured. May,
August, and October data are presented in Tables A-10 through A-12 in the appen-
dix.

Five of the 16 species taken for biomass determination were represented in
each of the three sampling periods. These species were smartweed (Polygonum
punctatum), dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), panic grass (Panicum spp.),
bagpod sesbania (Sesbania vesicaria), and indigo (Indigofera spp.)

Given in Table 4 and Figure 4 are the biomass data for the experimental
sites and control site for the three sampling periods of May, August, and
October. Biomass was not determined for the first sampling period since little
vegetative growth had occurred prior to the beginning of February. As expected,
biomass of upland and wetland species increased over time. Average wetland
species biomass was greater than upland species biomass on all sites during the
entire year except for sites 3 and 10 in August and for site 10 at year's end.
Site 10 had the greatest upland.species of all sites, and no wetland species
biomass at the year-end census.


1 L









Table 4. Biomass (g dry wt/m2) of wetland species compared to upland
species on experimental sites in May, August, and October 1983.



Sampling
Period Site Wetland Biomass Upland Biomass


05/83 3 11.88 2.95
6 22.74 1.09
7 32.49 1.17
8 75.91 0.52
9 6.67 0.03
10 --- --
Mean 29.94 1.15
C 2.65 0.39

08/83 3 5.82 19.10
6 26.76 17.98
7 188.08 29.85
8 186.14 9.49
9 40.10 6.32
10 2.43 4.92
Mean 74.89 14.61
C 6.07 74.98

10/83 3 96.12 33.93
6 135.94 28.83
7 157.28 43.34
8 353.11 59.44
9 303.19 142.75
10 --- 149.14
Mean 209.13 76.24
C --- 85.53


C = control site.











500r-


E
0
S
c1

*
E
o

0
5
o

'C
0
S
a


SITE 9


- WETLAND
SPECIES
O UPLAND
SPECIES


SITE 8


SITE 7


402-


J


SITE 6

7,







F/7
//V


150o-


SITE 3





//
/-


100o-


501-


0 .-


SITE 10

1]


.4 .. 4. I J .4 .. 4


MAY AUG OCT MAY AUG OCT MAY AUG OCT MAY AUG OCT MAY AUG OCT MAY AUG OCT


SITE 5
CONTROL






MAY AUG OCT


1983


Figure 4. Wetland and upland species biomass at three census times during 1983.









The control site wetland biomass throughout the year was lower when
compared to the mean for all sites, and showed an increase above the mean for
uplands species biomass. Sites 8 and 9 showed the greatest increase above the
mean wetland species biomass, while sites 9 and 10 showed the greatest increase
in upland species biomass. At the end of the growing season, sites 8 and 9 had
the greatest wetland species biomass.

At the end of the growing season sites 9 and 10 had the greatest upland
biomass of all sites, including the control. This is probably the result of the
differences in peat applied to these two sites verses the other sites. These
were the first two sites to have peat applied and consequently, the material
was dug from the edges of the donor swamp and may have contained more upland
species' genetic material than other peat that was obtained from more interior
locations. This is particularly unfortunate, since these two sites had the
lowest elevations and greatest thicknesses of peat applied of all sites, and
correlations of wetland biomass with elevation and peat thickness showed no
strong relationships.

Site 3 (the highest and driest site) had lowest total biomass and lowest
wetland biomass at year end, while site 9 (the wettest site) had highest total
biomass and second highest wetland biomass. Site 9 also had the greatest depth
of applied peat. Site 8, one of the drier sites, had the highest wetland
biomass at year's end.

The contribution to non-living biomass on the experimental sites from the
water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) that drifted over the sites during the
high water of April 1983 was determined. Percent cover of each site was
calculated from detailed maps and is shown schematically in Figure 5. The
overall contribution to non-living biomass based on percent cover of each site
and measured non-living biomass of hyacinth of 1594.84 g dry weight/mL is
given in Table 5. Sites 6 and 7 were most affected with 30.19% and 35.87%
cover, respectively.


Seedling Census

Three types of tree seedlings were planted in each experimental plot.
Swamp blackgum tupelo (Nyssa biflora) seedlings were collected from the natural
area and bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) and sweetgum (Liquidambar
styraciflua) were purchased from the Florida Division of Forestry. Growth and
survival rates of these seedlings were compared to four other seedling sites on
Occidental's reclamation areas, which were planted over the past 4 years. Each
of these sites varied in age and growth conditions. A 10-m wide transect was
plotted in each of the four areas. Originally not less than 30 individuals were
tagged and measured for height at each site. Average heights of trees planted
on the experimental sites and on Occidental's reclamation sites are given in
Table A-13 of the appendix. Survival on some plots was affected by excessive
flooding in April 1983 and wild animal grazing.

Survival and growth rates are given in Table 6 for the experimental sites
and Occidental's other reclamation areas. Growth rates on the experimental
sites were highest for sweetgum, followed by blackgum and bald cypress.










Table 5. Percent cover and nonliving biomass contribution of water hyacinth.



*Contribution of
Average % Cover Biomass on Exper-
Average % Cover Total Experimental mental Sites,
Site m Plots Sites g dry wt/m


C 0.07 9.78 155.98

3 17.67 12.20 194.57

6 13.83 30.19 481.43

7 33.25 35.87 572.07

8 26.50 17.63 281.17

9 43.83 18.48 294.17

10 8.25 5.91 94.26


*Based on 1594.84 g dry wt/m2 measured
percent cover on each experimental sit


nonliving biomass of hyacinth and











































Extent of coverage of experimental sites by water hyacinth after the high water
event in the week prior to 4/20/83.


Figure 5.










Table 6. Survival and growth rates for species planted on experimental sites and other reclamation sites.



Liquidambar
Nyssa biflora Taxodium distIchum styraciflua
Total Total
% % % % % % Survival Growth
Site Survival Growth Survival Growth Survival Growth Rate, % Rate, %


Experimental Sites

3
6
7
8
9
10

Reclamation Sites


100
86
72
90
95
1.05


96
1.12
67
87
84
78


87.5
84
47
67
76
49


A planted 1981 -- 100 16 100
B planted 1982 73 21 --
C planted 1982 58 8
D planted 1983 90 15


*Negative growth rates due to extensive grazing of Taxodlum.









Survival rates sites were highest for cypress, followed by sweet gum and black
gum, respectively.

During the very high water of April, many seedlings were covered by
hyacinth that floated across the sites. Site 7 (note Figure 5) was particularly
hard hit. The lowest site, site 10, had highest seedling mortality of blackgum
and cypress, and significant mortality of sweetgum, probably as a result of the
length of time and depth of inundation. If sites 7 and 10 are not included,
percent survival over the remaining sites for blackgum, cypress, and sweetgum
averaged 39%, 93%, and 67% respectively.

The only comparison in this first years growth, between the seedlings
planted on the experimental sites and those planted elsewhere on overburden is a
comparison between the experimental sites and site "D" in Table 6. The site "D"
cypress were planted at about the same time and were from basically the same
source, although different purchases. Overall growth rates and survival on the
experimental sites were not statistically different from those planted on the
overburden at site "D".



Accumulation/Loss of Peat


Peat depth was initially calculated from estimates of the volume of peat
applied to each experimental site and measured for more accurate determination
in April 1983 and January 1984. Water seldom covered the sites during the year,
thus peat was exposed to weathering and oxidation. Given in Table 7 are the
measured depths of peat at three locations on each of the experimental sites.
While there is no clear indication of trends of peat loss, half of the sites
showed decreases in depth, the majority of which were along the northern edge
next to the lake. The average loss of peat at these points was 8.5 cm. The
remaining locations showed a net increase in peat depth, probably due to differ-
ences in measuring technique rather than an actual increase in peat.



pH of Soils, Interstitial Waters, and Lake


Weekly measurements of lake water pH were made using an Orion Research Ion-
analyzer model 339A. When the experimental peat sites were saturated with
water, interstitial pH was measured. Given in Table 8 are the measured pH's of
interstitial water and the lake water for those periods when the peat on the
experimental sites was saturated. The experimental sites remained too dry to
hold measureable interstitial water from 29 April 1983 to 5 January 1984. Shown
in Figure 6 is the fluctuation of pH in the lake water adjacent to the
experimental sites.

The pH of the peat on the experimental sites was measured initially when
the peat was applied, again in March and May 1983, and finally in December 1983.
Given in Table 9 are the pH measurements in distilled water and 0.01 M CaC1
solution on the experimental sites. Representative samples of overburden and


I









Table 7. Peat depth (cm) on experimental sites.


04/29/83 01/05/84
Initial*
Site Estimate, cm South Middle North South Middle North


3 11.3 11 8 19 6 11 7

6 22.6 25 20 16 24 24 20

7 8.7 7 11 19 9 10 9

8 17.3 18 15 15 18 13 8

9 45.2 32 26 29 37 28 27

10 32.1 38 32 40 41 36 28.5


*Calculated from area covered by peat and estimation of volumes applied.










Table 8. pH of lake and interstitial water.*


Study Site
Date Lake 3 6 7 8 9 10


1/19 8.3 D D D D D 0

3/30 6.3 4.5 4.2 4.6 4.4 4.2 3.6

4/08 6.3 4.0 3.9 4.6 4.0 4.3 4.1

4/13 5.9 I I I I I I

4/20 5.7 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.1

4/29 8.2 D 0 D D D 0

5/06 6.8 D 0 D 0 D D

5/13 7.3 D D D D D D

5/20 7.1 D D D D D D


*Interstitial water in peat of experimental plots.
I = Inundated, D = Peat too dry to hold measurable water







































2.* 'n l M 1 20 1 20 2e b 0 1" I, 21 . 1. 22 12 U Al I I 23Mc1 7p 1;1 Z1 4 0 23 2 i 24 No3
Jan Feb I March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec


Lake water pH over the duration of the project. The wide fluctuation in April
coincides with very high rainfall and lake levels.


Figure 6.









Table 9. Soil pH determined In distilled water and 0.01 M CaCI.


11/24/82 03/30/83 05/13/83* 12/15/83

Distilled Distilled Distilled Distilled
Study Site Water CaCI Water CaCI Water CaCI Water CaCI


Site 3 3.70 2.80 4.30 3.45 4.80 3.50 4.40 3.70

Site 6 3.75 2.80 4.30 3.35 4.50 3.65 4.50 3.80

Site 7 4.30 3.80 4.50 3.60 4.60 3.70 4.45 3.80

Site 8 3.70 2.95 4.30 3.60 4.75 3.70 4.40 3.70

Site 9 3.70 2.90 4.30 3.50 4.80 3.70 4.40 2.90

Site 10 4.20 3.60 4.30 3.60 4.50 3.70 4.40 3.70

Control -- 4.50 3.70 5.80 4.40 --

Overburden 5.55 4.70 5.30 3.95 -

Overburden 5.55 4.75 -- ------ -

Cypress/gum
Swamp peat 4.05 3.20 -- -

Cypress/gmn
Swamp peat 4.05 3.15 -


*05/13/83, supernatant pH for distilled water.









peat from an undisturbed cypress/gum swamp are given for comparison. No signif-
icant trends in pH changes over the duration of the project are apparent.


Water Levels


Rainfall was monitored daily by Occidental Chemical Company on weekdays;
weekend values were summed. Monthly totals are given in Table A-14. Amounts
were typical for north-central Florida, though the summer rainfall made up a
smaller proportion of the total than was expected. During the early stages of
the project, January through April, total rainfall was greater than usual. May
and October were very dry.

Figure 7 is a histogram of daily rainfall during 1983. It is apparent that
most rainfall events were of limited depth, with 29 (46%) less than 0.5 cm, and
38 (60%) less than 1 cm. This is significant when considering soil moisture.
The soils at these sites are high in moisture-holding ability, and the
groundwater level was below the surface for nearly the entire year. Runoff
channels were well developed where water pooled and, after a rainfall,
percolation was very slow. Under these conditions, most small rainfall events
wet very little soil. In the peats most water cycled internally, rainfall to
evapotranspiration. Thus, in the absence of direct groundwater connections or
significant internal runoff, these limited rainfall events only wet the soil for
a day or two at the most. In spite of abundant rainfall, sites located above
the water table were dry most of the time, at least in the root zone.

Since most rainfall events provide little long-term soil moisture, wetland
soil conditions at a site such as this depend on a high groundwater table. The
experimental sites are located directly adjacent to a lake. Water levels in the
lake were measured weekly, and a water level recorder provided continuous moni-
toring for most periods. Due to the proximity of the sites to the lake, ground-
water levels were assumed equal to lake levels. With the exception of transient
conditions, such as during and immediately after a rainfall, or while lake
levels are being artificially lowered, this is probably an accurate assumption.
Thus for the purposes of comparison of groundwater levels with elevation of
experimental sites, lake levels were used as indicative of groundwater levels.

Lake levels, weekly rainfall amounts, and mean site elevations are plotted
in Figure 8. While lake levels are controlled artificially by Occidental, they
track rainfall amounts in a general manner during most of the year, though major
exceptions are found. Most prominent is the rapid and extreme lowering of the
lake level from April 13 to April 29. During this period the level decreased
from 37.06 m to 35.95 m, or 1.11 m. This followed a substantial rainfall of
9.45 cm the previous week and 5.56 cm during the period when the lake level was
lowered. Lake levels remained low during most of summer and rose again to a
peak of 36.84 m on September 16. Once again the level dropped precipitously
despite apparently adequate rainfall. During autumn, rainfall amounts decreased
and lake levels were very low until the heavy rainfalls in early winter. The
lowering of lake levels for much of the growing season contributed to very short
hydroperiods for the experimental sites.


































Figure 7. Frequency distribution of week day rainfall amounts near
experimental sites during 1983.


0.5 1.0 15 2.0 2.5 3.0 35


r--- -


40 4.5 5.0


DAILY RAINFALL (cm)


Weekly rainfall and lake levels during
of experimental sites.


1983 with mean elevations


Figure 8.


5.5 60 +









Hydroperiod

Hydroperiod, or the total number days during the year when water is at or
above the soil surface, is a critical parameter in the establishment and differ-
entiation of wetlands types. Approximate hydroperiods have been measured for
different wetlands ecosystems in Florida by Wharton et al. (1977) and Brown and
Starnes (1983). Hydroperiods range from 365 days a year for marshes to 100-150
days for hydric hammocks. Given in Table 10 are the mean elevations and hydro-
periods (determined from water level records and mean elevations) for the exper-
imental sites. The longest hydroperiod was 48 days for experimental site 9,
indicating that appropriate wetland hydroperiods fell short of those observed
for natural wetland communities. The timing of inundation was also inappropri-
ate for wetland formation, with little flooding occurring during the active
growing season. It is thus clear that hydrologic conditions were generally not
conducive to wetland development.

It is apparent from Table 10 that very small changes in elevation can make
major changes in hydroperiods. The hydroperiods for each of the square meter
study plots were determined using elevation of each plot and water level
recordings, and compared with the number of wetland, transitional, and upland
species found on each plot. These data are given in Table 11. The majority of
plots had short hydroperiods with 74% having hydroperiods less than 30 days.
While there are fewer species in all groups as hydroperiod increases (probably
due to the decreasing sample size [i.e., number or plots]), some trends are
apparent. Transition zone species make up a larger proportion of the species
found at longer hydroperiods and upland species make up a smaller proportion.
This could indicate that the upland species are at a competitive disadvantage on
the wetter sites and that some of these plot hydroperiods are approaching
wetland duration. It is interesting that only two upland species, panic grass
(Panicum commutatum) and crab grass (Digitaria sanguinalis) are found at
hydroperiods greater than 50 days. However, there are too few plots in these
longer hydroperiod classes to be conclusive and one year may be too short a time
to draw hard conclusions. The number of submerged species exhibits no obvious
pattern, indicating again that these hydroperiods may be too short for
establishment of species requiring greater periods of saturated and/or inundated
soils.

The relationships of hydroperiod to number and mean biomass of submerged,
transitional, and upland species are given in Figures 9A and 9B. The graphs
express hydroperiod as a mean for each experimental site. While there are no
significant differences between numbers of species of each class versus
hydroperiod, total biomass in each class exhibits some change with increasing
hydroperiod. As might be expected the biomass of upland species decreases
rapidly with increasing.hydroperiod, while the biomass of transitional species
increases. The biomass of submerged species is lowest with a hydroperiod of 40
days. This low point corresponds to experimental site 10 and as stated
previously, may be the result of differences in the peat material instead of any
relationship to hydroperiod.

A more detailed picture of the relationships of hydroperiod to mean biomass
is given in Figures 10A and 10B. The hydroperiod and mean biomass for each of
the square meter study plots are graphed. Since there is much greater variation
in elevation for each of the study plots as compared to the mean elevation of
the experimental sites, there are a number of plots with hydroperiods greater









Table 10. Mean elevation and hydroperiod of experimental sites.


Site Elevation, m Hydroperiod, days


3 36.77 11

6 36.74 13

8 36.73 14

7 36.66 21

10 35.59 40

9 35.57 48










Table 11. Number of species found in plots by hydroperiod class.


Hydroperiod, Number of
days Plots Submerged Transitional Upland


0-9 19 10 7 11
10-19 19 8 6 8
20-29 14 8 8 6
30-39 5 3 4 4
40-49 2 5 2 2
50-59 1 2 2 0
60-69 1 0 2 1
70-79 0 0 0 0
80-89 2 1 4 0
90-99 3 2 4 0
100-109 2 2 4 1
110-119 2 2 4 1
120+ 2 2 4 0















A UPLAND 8PECIE8
* TRANSITIONAL SPECIES
* SUBMERGED SPECIES


I0-
9-
8-
7-
6-
5-
4-
3-
2-
1 -


I I II I I I I I


Hydroperlod, days


A UPLAND
* TRANSITIONAL
* SUBMERGED


Hydroperlod on Experimental Sites, Days


a. Number of upland, transitional, and submerged species
found versus the hydroperiod of experimental site.
b. Mean biomass of upland, transitional, and submerged
species versus hydroperiod of experimental sites.


O\


Figure 9.















A UPLAND
* TRANSITIONAL
* SUBMERGED


40 60 80


140 160 180 200


Hydroperiod Days


I I I I I I I I I
S 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Hydroperiod, Days


Figure 10.


a. Mean biomass of upland, transitional, and submerged
species on plots having peat versus hydroperiod.
b. Mean total biomass versus hydroperiod for plots
having peat.


1500-

1200-

900-

600 -









than 50 days (see Tables 10 and 11). In Figure 10A the larger number of data
points gives a clearer picture of the increase in transitional species biomass
with increasing hydroperiod when compared to the graph in Figure 9B. Total mean
biomass (the sum of upland, transitional, and submerged biomass) versus hydro-
period is graphed in Figure 10B. The trend indicates increasing biomass with
increasing hydroperiod; however, it is important to bear in mind the relatively
small number of sites that had hydroperiods greater than 50 days when drawing
conclusions from both Figures 10A and 10B.



Topographic Diversity

Natural wetland ecosystems, whether young or mature, tend to have small-
scale topographic variation. The variation results from geologic forces, tree
growth and uprooting, animal activity, and hydrologic events, and creates many
potential habitat types. In ecosystems with a fluctuating water table close to
the surface, this variation in topography may be of great importance to micro-
habitat conditions and the development of community plant diversity.

During the application of peat to the experimental sites, large equipment
was used to deposit and spread the material under somewhat adverse conditions.
Some unevenness of the applied peat could be expected, adding to the existing
variation in terrain resulting from initial contouring. Elevations at all 12
study plots within each of the experimental sites were determined and the
standard deviation of these elevations, expressed in meters, was used as the
measure of topographic diversity. Given in Table 12 are the mean depths of
peat, volume applied, and topographic diversity (s) for each of the experimental
sites. The first three sites are strip treatments, and the second three sites
are uniform spreading treatments. Within each of the major treatment categories
(strips and uniform spreading) greater topographic diversity was associated with
greater volumes of material. For the same volume, there was greater diversity
with the strips than the uniform treatment, as would be expected.

To test whether the biotic factors are closely related to microhabitat
variation at this early stage of ecosystem development, overall plant diversity
was calculated for each study site using the Shannon Index (Shannon and Weaver
1949) and was regressed on topographic diversity (Figure 11). The positive
linear correlation (r = 0.79) is significant at the 90% level, using a t-test
for population correlation (Steel and Torrie 1980). Site 3 has the greatest
divergance from the general pattern. This site is at the highest elevation
relative to water level and had peat applied in strips. These two factors may
explain the higher plant diversity because of the inclusion of a larger number
of upland species. Presence of peat was highly significant at early sampling
dates but became less significant as high-growth legumes took over the nonpeat
areas.









Table 12. Topographic diversity (s) and experimental treatment. Topographic
diversity is,calculated as standard deviation of elevations within
each site.


Depth, cm Volume, m3 s, m


STRIPS

Site 3 12.67 46.30 0.06

\ Site 6 20.33 74.29 0.12

Site 9 29.00 105.97 0.18

UNIFORM

Site 7 12.33 117.42 0.05

Site 8 16.00 152.37 0.08

Site 10 36.67 377.11 0.17






































' I I I I I 1 I


0 D2 04 .06 D0 JO J2 J4 J6 J8 .20

Landscape Diversity


Figure 11.


Relation of plant diversity to topographic diversity (land-
scape diversity) for experimental sites. Plant diversity
is the Shannon Index, H' = -Z p. log p., and topographic
diversity is the standard deviation of'elevations within
each site in meters. Data point numbers correspond to
experimental sites (see Figure 3).


244-


1I -









Statistical Evaluation of Results


Various statistical tests were performed to evaluate the effects of the
treatments, presence and absence of peat, elevation, hydroperiod, and thickness
of peat on the numbers, diversity, and biomass of plant species on the experi-
mental sites. With only one year's data, and the complications induced because
of the low water levels, the statistical evaluations are not as strong as one
would like. Where correlation coefficients were close to "1" the results were
not statistically significant.

Differences in mean biomass between plots that received peat and those that
did not were evaluated with t-tests. Figure 12 shows the relationships between
peat and non-peat plots. The non-peat plots are all plots in the strip ,
treatment experimental sites that were not on the peat and the control plot.
The differences (assuming unequal variances) between total biomass on plots with
peat and without peat are significant to the 96% confidence level. The tests
for differences in submerged species biomass were also significant at the 99.95
confidence level. However, such high confidence levels were not associated with
the differences in peat and no peat for transitional and upland species biomass.
There was no significant difference in transitional or upland species biomass
between peat and non-peat plots.

Multiple regressions on plot data for upland, transitional, and submerged
species versus peat depth and hydroperiod were performed. The regression equa-
tions, R-squared, and sum of squares explained by each variable are given in
Table 13. These statistical results are given for comparative purposes, since
the R2 for regression equations suggests that there still exists significant
unexplained variation in the biomass occurring on the study plots.


Economic Costs

Two nomograms relating travel distance and application rate to the costs
per acre of applying peat material to reclamation sites are given in Figure 13.
These relationships based on data obtained from the experimental plots at the
Occidental reclamation site are shown in Figure 13a. Data from a reclamation
site at the Gardinier mine near Fort Meade, Florida, are used to construct the
nomogram in Figure 13b.

The differences in costs reflect different conditions and different methods
of transporting the material from the donor swamps to the reclamation site. At
the Occidental sites, Cat 627 scrapper pans were used to transport the material,
while at the Gardinier site, 10-yard dump trucks were used. Conditions at the
Occidental site were much different than those at Gardinier. Much of the haul
road at Occidental was over newly recontoured land, and due to the weight of the
pans, the condition of the road deteriorated rapidly. An additional piece of
equipment (motor grader) was necessary to maintain the condition of the haul
road. The road conditions did not seem to affect the round trip travel time
significantly, however, since travel times were almost identical when the dif-
ferences in distance were considered.


















Plots with Peat,
N=66\


Plots without Peat,
N=29















Mv


SUBMERGED TRANSITIONAL
SPECIES SPECIES


UPLAND
SPECIES


Figure 12.


Mean biomass of submerged, transitional, and
on plots with peat and plots without peat at
growing season, 1983.


upland species
the end of the









Table 13. Multiple regression equations, R-squared, and sum of squares
explained by,each variable for submerged, transitional, upland, and
total biomass versus peat depth and hydroperiod for study plots.



Sum of Squares Explained By

Equation R2 Peat Depth Hydroperiod


Submerged Biomass

Biomass = 151 + 3.12 P + 1.27 H 8.3% 23% 67%

Transitional Biomass

Biomass = -44.7 + 5.61 P + 3.82 H 43.9% 29% 71%

Upland Biomass

Biomass = 59.7 0.668 P 0.437 H 16.6% 30% 70%

Total Biomass

Biomass = 166 + 8.06 P + 2.12 H 25.7% 67% 33%


Biomass in g/m2.

P = peat depth in cm; H =


hydroperiod in days.











(a) North Florida Trial
based on cost of
$408.98/acre in.*mi.


1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0


ROUND


TRIP DISTANCE (miles)


(b) Central Florida Trial
based on cost of
$236.94/acre in.* mi.


ROUND


TRIP DISTANCE (miles)


Figure 13.


Travel distance and application rate versus cost per acre
of applying peat material, a. based on Occidental's
reclamation site. b. based on Gardinier's reclamation
site.









Generally, the Occidental trials were done as follows: The peat material
was obtained from a swamp after the vegetative cover had been removed by a Cat
0-8 dozer. Groundwater levels were lowered prior to the work progressing; how-
ever, there were still saturated soils within the swamp. The material in the
swamp could not be removed by the Cat 627 pans alone and the help of a D-8 dozer
was required. Once loaded, travel time over the 4.8 km (3-mile) round trip was
about 25 minutes. Spreading of material was accomplished directly with the pans
and was finished using a small Komatsu dozer.

The trials at Gardinier were done as follows: The peat material was dug
from the donor swamp using a 308 dragline and stockpiled whenever a dump truck
was not available for loading, otherwise the material was placed directly into
the dump truck. The travel time over the 3.6 km (2.25-mile) round trip was
about 20 minutes. The material was dumped along the edges of the wetland area
and pushed into the wetland by dozers. The conditions within the wetlands were
quite wet, causing spreading costs to be somewhat higher than might be expected
with drier conditions.

The cost breakdown for transporting and spreading the material to both
sites is given in Figure 14. Details of calculations are given as notes to
Figure 14. Costs are calculated on a cubic-yard basis and do not reflect the
differences in round-trip travel distances. The bulk of the costs for trans-
porting material at the Occidental site was for the Cat 627 pans (costing nearly
3 times what a dump truck costs while delivering only about 39% more material
per trip). Spreading costs at the Gardinier site were over twice those at the
Occidental site reflecting the difficulty in spreading material in very low
areas with unstable soils due to standing water. At the Occidental site, enough
drawdown of water levels had occurred so as to minimize effect of unstable soils
in the application process.
























KOMATSU DOZER

MOTOR GRADER


D-8 DOZER


6-

5

0
S4-
$6.10 CAT (

3

2


Occidental Site



Occidental Site


327 PANS


SPREADING


DIGGING &
TRANSPORT







D-3, D-5, D-6 DOZERS



DRAGLINE.PAYLOADER
and DUMP TRUCKS


Gardinier Site


Figure 14. Cost breakdown for transporting and spreading the peat
material for each reclamation site.









Notes to Figure 13 and Figure 14.

1. Occidental Experimental Sites.

Total Cost, $10,484.00
Material Moved, 1148.8 yd3 (878.4 m3)
Round Trip Travel Distance, 3 miles (4.8 km)
Area of Application, 0.986 acres (.4 ha)

Four Cat 627 scrapper pans were used to dig and transport material. A 0-6
dozer was required to push pans through the donor wetland, and a 16 G motor
grader was required for continual maintenance of about half of the haul
road. A Komatsu dozer was used to spread the material on the sites.

The calculations for Figure 13a are as follows:

(1148.8 yd3 x 27 ft3/yd3)/(43560 ft2/acre) = 0.712 acre ft applied

= 8.54 acre inches applied.

($10,484)/(8.54 acre in x 3 mi) = $408.98/acre-in-mi.

In Figure 14 the 627 scrapper pans, D-8 dozer and motor grader were charged
to digging and transport, while the Komatsu dozer was charged to spreading.

2. Gardinier Site.

Total Cost, $13,406.50
Material Moved, 3381 cu yd (2585.1 m3)
Round Trip Travel Distance, 2.25 miles (3.6 km)
Area of Application, 6.1 acres (2.5 ha)

Four 10-yard dump trucks were used to transport material. A 30B dragline
and 966 payloader were used to dig and load material. D-6, D-5, and D-3
dozers were used to spread material.

The calculations for Figure 13b are as follows:

(3381 yd3 x 27 ft3/yd3)/(43560 ft2/acre) = 2.1 acre ft applied

= 25.15 acre inces applied.

($13,406.50)/(25.15 acre in x 2.25 mi) = $236.94/acre-in-mi.

In Figure 14 the dump trucks, dragline, and payloader were charged to
digging and transport, while the 3 dozers were charged to spreading.


L















DISCUSSION


The lower than anticipated water levels over the experimental sites have
overshadowed the results of this test of peat "inoculation" as a means of for-
ested wetland re-creation. Undoubtedly, the lower water levels and the fact
that the sites were dry for long periods of the year affected the germination,
survival, and growth rates of the plant species present as propagules and seeds.
While no woody species were seen to germinate on the experimental sites, the
sites were quite rapidly colonized by herbaceous wetland species. The prepon-
derance of wetland species and their contribution to total biomass on each of
the experimental sites, especially when compared with the control site where no
peat was applied, is strong evidence that this method warrants serious consider-
ation as a method of wetland re-creation.

Biomass at the end of the growing season on the experimental sites when
compared to the control was impressive. Total biomass on two of the sites was
nearly 5 times the biomass on the control. Wetland species biomass was non-
existent on the control while the mean standing crop of wetland species was
greater than 200 g dry wt./m2 for the experimental sites. Two of the exper-
imental sites had over 300 g dry wt./m6 of wetland species biomass at the end
of the growing season (sites 8 and 9).

The survival and growth rates of tree seedlings planted in peat are encour-
aging. Of the three species planted, bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) had the
highest survival rate (when those damaged by grazing were excluded). The best
growth rates were exhibited by sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), although
survival rates were not as high as Taxodium. The survival of swamp blackgum
tupelo (Nyssa biflora) was lower, but growth rates of those that survived were
excellent.

The lack of a sufficient hydroperiod undoubtedly affected the overall
results of the project, yet the strong relationships between biotic factors
within wetland systems and hydroperiod are reinforced. Generally the amount and
types (upland, transitional, and submerged species) of plants that survived and
grew on the experimental sites were controlled by the hydroperiod. It cannot be
stressed enough how important hydroperiod is to developing and maintaining
wetland ecological systems.

The amount of peat applied and method of application seems to have some
affect on the survival and growth of wetland species and overall community
structure. The relationship is not as clear as one would like, when the effect
of decreased hydroperiod due to higher elevations is taken into account. Gener-
ally, as the thickness of peat increases, survival and growth of submerged and
transitional species increases while upland species show a marked decline in
growth and survival. Highest wetland biomass at the end of the growing season
was on site 8 where peat thickness averaged about 16 cm (6 inches). Average









biomass per experimental site is higher on those sites where peat was spread
uniformly, yet greatest diversity is achieved where there is greater variation
in topographic relief created by uneven application of peat in strips.

The quality of peat strongly influences the quality of wetland achieved
after inoculation. Of importance is the area and depth from which the peat is
dug. The first material removed from the donor swamp was dug from the edge
where the material resembled the sandier soils of the surrounding pine flatwoods
community. Germination of wetland species on this material was not nearly as
prevalent as with material that was obtained from more interior locations. Many
studies in a variety of ecological systems (for example see Harper, 1977) have
confirmed that viable seeds drop off rapidly with increasing soil depth. As a
consequence it is recommended that material should be taken from the top 1 foot
or so of the soil column within the donor wetland.

While it is impossible to tell in only one year if this method of wetland
re-creation will establish sufficient numbers of wetland tree species to meet
current reclamation rules, these tests do show that a herbaceous cover of
wetland species can be established. Even without the successful germination of
woody species, the inoculating method might be used in conjunction with direct
planting of wetland tree seedlings where forested wetlands are needed. In this
way, rapid colonization by wetland herbaceous species is insured to help
establish some wetland function from the outset, rather than waiting years for
such establishment and the resulting functional equivalency. A second benefit
of the inoculation technique used in conjunction with direct planting may be the
establishment of a diverse wetland capable of competing with cattail (Typha
spp.) and thus preventing the monospecific strands of cattail that sometimes
develop in wetland reclamation areas.

There is no question that of the two techniques of transporting the peat
material analyzed in this study, the use of draglines to dig and dump trucks to
transport the peat is far more cost effective than using scrapper pans. The
costs of digging and transporting peat using a dragline and dump trucks were
$1.33/yd3 (2.25 miles round trip distance) as compared to $8.01 for digging
and transporting the material using scrapper pans (3.0 round trip miles). When
the costs of spreading are included, the north Florida trial costs were $9.13
per yd3 while the costs at the central Florida trial were $3.97 per yd3.
The differences in spreading costs between the two trials can be attributed to
the differences in site conditions. The central Florida site was lower and
wetter than the north Florida site, and required extra effort for spreading.

In summary, the following points can be made:

1. Proper hydroperiod is one of the most critical parameters that
must be controlled when reconstructing wetland systems.
2. Herbaceous wetland species are easily established through inocu-
lation or mulching with wetland peats, although it has yet to be
established if woody species germination will be a success.
3. It is possible to develop a high quality herbaceous wetland with-
in one (1) growing season using wetland peat mulching that has
greater total biomass, far greater wetland biomass, and greater






51


species diversity than is possible on sites with no peat inocula-
tion.
4. A high degree of variation in elevation within wetland system
tends to increase diversity of plant species. With hummocks and
low areas present within the wetland, more micro-environments are
present that are colonized by a greater variety of species toler-
ant to a variety of hydrologic conditions.
5. The costs of wetland peat mulching can vary considerably depend-
ing on the equipment and techniques used but are competitive with
other techniques such as purchase and direct planting of wetland
species.















LITERATURE CITED


Brown, S. L. 1978. A Comparison of Cypress Ecosystems in the Landscape of
Florida. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville.

Brown, M. T. and E. M. Starnes. 1983. A wetlands study of Seminole County:
identification, evaluation, and preparation of development\ standards and
guidelines. Technical Report 41, Center for Wetlands, University of
Florida, Gainesville.

Godfrey, R. K. and J. W. Wooten. 1979. Aquatic and Wetland plants of South-
eastern United States. University of Georgia Press. Athens, Georgia.

Harper, J. L. 1977. Population Biology of Plants. Academic Press. New York.

Monk, C. D. and T. W. Brown 1965. Ecological considerations of Cypress Heads in
North Central Florida. American Midland Naturalist 74(1) p. 126-140.

Shannon, C. E., and W. Weaver. 1949. The mathematical theory of communication.
University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Steel, R. G. D., and J. H. Torrie. 1980. Principles and procedures of statis-
tics: a biometrical approach, 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Wharton, C. H., H. T. Odum, K. Ewel, M. Duever, A. Lugo, R. Boyt, J. Bartholo-
mew, E. DeBellevue, S. Brown, M. Brown, and L. Duever. 1977. Forested
Wetlands of Florida- Their Management and Use. Center for Wetlands,
University of Florida, Gainesville.

































APPENDIX A
Summary Data for Experimental Sites






















Table A-I. Summary vegetation data, cypress/gum reference swamp, site I (lnngth of transact. 200 m; 20 plots)


Number of Number of
Individuals Plots


Basal Relative Relative
Frequency Area Frequency Density


TREES (>10 cm'dbh)


Acer rubrum
Cephalenthus occidentalis
Magnolia virqlnlana
Nyssa syIlvatlca
Persea palustris
Plnus elllottll
Taxodium distlchum


Standing dead


TOTAL


409 0.049
129 0.024
1166 0.073
31529 0.488
82 0.024
179 0.024
5857 0.220


0.015
0.008
0.038
0.777
0.008
0.008
0.115


0.010
0.003
0.029
0.774
0.002
0.004
0.144


4 0.20 1407 0.098 0.031 0.034


130 41 2.05 40758 1.000


SAPLINGS (<10 o dbh)

Acer rubrum
Agarlsta popullfolla
Cephalanthus occidental ls
Clethra alnlfolla
Lyonla lucida
Magnolia vlrqlnlana
Myrica cerlfera
Nyssa sylvatlca
Persea palustrls
Taxodlum ascendens


Standing dead


4 0.20


220 0.071
10 0.018
80 0.071
69 0.143
288 0.179
129 0.036
332 0.125
331 0.161
132 0.054
75 0.071


1.000 1.000 100.0


0.057
0.015
0. 103
0. 139
0.374
0.056
0.097
0.077
0.015
0.031


0.120
0.005
0.042
0.036
0. 151
0.068
0.175
0.174
0.069
0.040


229 0.071 0.036 0.120


195 56 2.75 1904 1.000 1.000 1.000 100.0


Species


Relative
Basal
Area


importance
Value


-~~ ~-----~


TOTAL





















Table A-2. Summary vegetation data, cypress/gum reference swamp, site II (length of transect, 1100 m; 11 plots).


Relative
Number of Numbor of Basal Relative Relative Basal Importance
Individuals Plots Frequency Area Frequency Density Area Value


TREES (>10 em dbh)

Magnole a virglnlana
Nyssa sl vatca
Taxodlum ascendens


0.09 712 0.059
1.00 20868 0.065
0.18 1280 0.118


0.036 0.030
0.857 0.881
0.054 0.054


829 0.176 0.054 0.035


56 17 1.54 23689 1.000


SAPLINGS (<10 on dbh)

Acer rubrum
Clethra alnifolla
Itea virglnlca
Lyonle liaustrlna
Lyonla luclda
Myrica cerlfera
Nyssa syIvatlca
Persea palustrls
Taxodlum ascendens


Standing dead


4 0.057
94 0.228
16 0.086
37 0.086
106 0.228
62 0.057
201 0.114
20 0.086
8 0.029


0.09


1.000 1.000 100.0


0.009
0.306
0.047
0.072
0.426
0.068
0.025
0.030
0.013


0.007
0.156
0.027
0.061
0.176
0.103
0.333
0.033
0.013


55 0.029 0.004 0.091


603 1.000 1.000 1.000 100.0


Species


Standing dead


TOTAL


3 3 0.27


TOTAL


235 35 3.17





















Table A-3. Plant population structure on eopernmental sites, February 4, 1983.




Site 3 Site 6 Site 7

Species )N RD FREQ RF IMP NO RD FREQ RF IMP NO RD FREQ RF IMP


Eleocharls baldwlnli 5 1.02 0.83 7.14 4.08 19 4.53 0.83 4.55 4.54 1 0.17 0.08 2.86 1.52
Hydrocotyle umbel late -- -- -- -- 1 0.17 0.08 2.86 1.48
Polygonu punctatum 455 92.67 0.58 50.00 71.34 368 87.83 0.66 36.36 62.10 495 81.82 1.00 34.29 58.06
Unknown composite I 2 0.41 0.17 14.29 7.35 5 1.19 0.33 18.18 9.69 12 1.98 0.33 11.43 6.71
Unknown conposlte 2 23 4.68 0.17 14.29 9.49 17 4.06 0.42 22.73 13.40 82 13.55 0.92 31.43 22.5
Unknown grass I 6 1.22 0.17 14.29 7.76 10 2.39 0.33 18.18 10.29 14 2.31 0.50 17.14 9.73

TOTAL 491 100 100 100 419 100 100 100 605 100 100 100








Table A-3. (continued.)




Site 8 Site 9 Site 10*

NO RD FREQ RF IMP NO RO FREO RF IMP NO RD FREQ RF IMP


Eleocharls baldwlnll 1 0.28 0.08 4.16 2.22 13 12.50 0.25 23.08 17.79 -
Hydrocotyle umbellat 4 3.85 0.83 7.69 5.77
Polyonu punctatum 346 95.32 1.00 50.00 72.66 78 75.00 0.42 38.46 56.73 -
Unknown composite 1 3 0.83 0.16 8.33 4.58 2 1.92 0.16 15.38 8.65 -
Unknown composite 2 7 1.93 0.42 20.83 11.38 -
Unknown grass 1 6 1.65 0.33 16.67 9.16 7 6.73 0.16 15.38 11.06

TOTAL 363 100 100 100 104 100 100 100 -


*No plant species growth.





















Table A-3. (Continued.)


Control Site


NO RD FREQ RF IMP


Site Total

NO RO FREQ RF IMP


Eleocharls ba.ldwinll
Hydrocotyle umbel late
Polygonn punctatum
Unknown composite 1
Unknown composite 2
Unknown grass 1


TOTAL


39 1.97 0.10 6.48 4.23
- 5 0.25 0.03 1.85 1.03
-- 1742 87.89 0.61 40.74 64.32
- 24 1.21 0.19 12.96 7.09
- 129 6.51 0.32 21.30 13.91
- 43 2.17 0.25 16.67 9.42


- -- - 1982 100


100 100


Species














Table A-4. Plant population structure on experimental sites, May 5, 1983.


Site 3 Site 6


Spec les


Acer rubrum
Baccharls angustifolla
Cassia fasclculata
Cephalanthus occidental Is
OulIchium arundinaceum
Eleocharls baldwin I
Eupatorlum capi itoil um
Hydrocotyle umbellate
Juncus acuminatus
Lepldlu. vlrglnlcum
Pan cum clandestinum
Panicum spp.
Paspalum urv llel
Polygonum punctatum
Potamogeton spp.
Rubus trivialls
Sal x carolinlana
Saururus cernuus
Spartina bakeril
Unknown composite A
Unknown composite 3
Unknown grass A
Unknown grass B
Unknown grass C
Unknown grass 0
Unknown herb A
Unknown herb 8
Unknown herb C
Unknown herb 0
Unknown herb E
Unknown herb F
Unknown herb G
Unknown herb H
Unknown herb I
Unknown herb J
Unknown herb K
Unknown herb L
Unknown herb M
Unknown herb N
Unknown herb 0
Unknown legume
Unknown mint

TOTAL


NO RD FREQ RF IMP





16 1.24 0.42 10.42 5.83

6 0.46 0.17 4.17 2.32
4 0.31 0.25 6.25 3.28
76 5.86 0.58 14.58 10.22




6 0.46 0.33 8.33 4.40

621 47.92 0.50 12.50 30.21

2 0.15 0.83 2.08 1.12
2 0.14 0.83 2.08 1.12
16 1.24 0.33 8.33 4.79

1 0.08 0.83 2.08 1.08

541 41.74 0.92 22.92 32.33
3 0.23 0.83 2.08 1.16


1 0.08 0.83 2.08 1.08

















1 0.08 0.83 2.08 1.08


10 RD FREQ RF IMP


3 0.23
I 0.08
29 2.21
4 0.30
64 4.87


1 0.08



870 66.16



37 2.81
1 0.08


301 22.89





2 0. 15
1 0.08















1 0.08


0.08 2.04 1.14
0.08 2.04 1.06
0.25 6.12 4.16
0.16 4.08 2.19
0.66 16.33 10.60


0.08 2.04 1.06



1.00 24.49 45.32



0.42 10.20 6.51
0.08 2.04 1.06


0.92 22.45 22.67




0.16 4.08 2.12
0.08 2.04 1.06















0.08 2.04 1.06


Site 7

NO RD FREO RF IMP


9 0.69

5 0.38

185 14.11
1 0.08






878 66.97
3 0.23


11 0.84



194 14.80
5 0.38





I 0.08

15 1.14
1 0.08











3 0.23


0.08 1.82 1.26

0.16 3.64 2.01

1.00 21.82 17.97
0.08 1.82 0.95






1.00 21.82 44.40
0.25 5.45 2.84


0.50 10.91 5.88



0.92 20.00 17.40
0.08 1.82 1.10





0.08 1.82 0.95

0.08 1.82 1.48
0.08 1.82 0.95











0.25 5.45 2.84


100 100 1315 100


1296 100


100 100 1311 100


100 100





















Table A-4. (continued.)


Site 8

to RD FREQ RF IMP


SIto 9

NO RD FREQ RF IMP


Site 10

NO RD FREQ PF IMP


Acer rubrum
Baccharls angustifolla
Cassia fasciculata
Cephalanthus occidentalls
Dullchlum arundInaceum
Eleocharls baldwinll
Eupatorlum capillifollum
Hydrocotyle umbellata
Juncus acumlnatus
Lepldlum vlrglnlcum
Panlcum clandestlnum
Panicum spp.
Paspalum urvillel
Polygonum punctatum
Potamogeton spp.
Rubus trivialls
Salix carollnlana
Saururus cernuus
Spartlna bakerll
Unknown composite A
Unknown composite 3
Unknown grass A
Unknown grass B
Unknown grass C
Unknown grass 0
Unknown herb A
Unknown herb 8
Unknown herb C
Unknown herb D
Unknown herb E
Unknown herb F
Unknown herb G
Unknown herb H
Unknown herb I
Unknown herb J
Unknown herb K
Unknown herb L
Unknown herb M
Unknown herb N
Unknown herb 0
Unknown legume
Unknown mint


4 0.54 0.17 3.39 1.87

5 0.42 0.33 6.78 3.60
2 0.17 0.17 3.39 1.78
64 5.36 1.00 20.34 12.85







922 77.28 1.00 20.34 4.81

1 0.08 0.08 1.69 0.89

7 0.59 0.42 8.47 4.53
2 0.17 0.08 1.69 0.93


177 14.84 0.92 18.64 16.74
2 0.17 0.17 3.39 1.78
2 0.17 0.17 3.39 1.78





I 0.08 0.08 1.69 0.89


1 0.08 0.08 1.69 0.89
I 0.08 0.08 1.69 0.89









2 0.17 0.17 3.37 1.78


1 0.19 0.08 2.86 1.53



3 0.57 0.25 8.57 4.57
48 9.09 0.33 11.43 10.26
4 0.76 0.17 5.71 3.24
18 3.41 0.08 2.86 3.14






215 40.72 0.50 17.14 28.93



6 1.14 0.17 5.71 3.43



199 37.69 0.83 28.57 33.13
8 1.52 0.17 5.71 3.62












3 0.57 0.08 2.86 1.72
2 0.38 0.08 2.86 1.62
6 1.14 0.08 2.86 2.00





15 2.84 0.04 2.86 2.85


1 1.37 0.08 5.00 3.19

4 5.48 0.17 10.00 7.74

1 1.37 0.08 5.00 3.19







2 2.74 0.17 10.00 6.39








53 72.60 0.66 40.00 56.30
4 5.48 0.17 10.00 7.74

3 4.11 0.08 5.00 4.56













2 2.74 0.08 5.00 3.87



3 4.11 0.17 10.00 7.06


TOTAL 1193 100 100 100 528 100 100 100 73 100 100 100


____~____ ___


___~_~_~~~_


TOTAL


1193 100


100 100 528 100


100 100


73 100


100 100
















Table A-4. (continued.)


Control Site

NO RD FREO RF IMP


Site Total

NO RD FREO RF IMP


Acer rubrum
Beccharls angustlfolla
Cassla fasclculata
Cephalanthus occidental Is
Dul chlum arundlnaceum
Eleocharls baldwlnll
Eupatorlum caplllIfollum
Hydrocotyle umbellate
Juncus acuminatus
Lepldlum vlrglnlcum
Pan cum clandestlnum
Panicum spp.
Paspalum urvlllel
Polyon punctat
Potamogeton spp.
Rubus trivlalls
SalIx carolinlana
Saururus cernuus
Spartlna bakerl I
Unknown composite A
Unknown composite 3
Unknown grass A
Unknown grass B
Unknown grass C
Unknown grass 0
Unknown herb A
Unknown herb B
Unknown herb C
Unknown herb D
Unknown herb E
Unknown herb F
Unknown herb G
Unknown herb H
Unknown herb I
Unknown herb J
Unknown herb K
Unknown herb L
Unknown herb M
Unknown herb N
Unknown herb 0
Unknown legume
Unknown mint


4 0.23
274 15.63

15 0.86
3 0.17
6 0.34

15 0.86

3 0.17

1064 60.70
63 3.59






1 0.06
6 0.34


















8 0.46
73 4.16
218 12.44


0.25 6.52 3.37
0.92 23.91 19.77

1.00 26.09 13.47
0.25 6.52 3.34
0.33 8.70 4.52

0.08 2.17 1.52

0.17 4.35 2.26

0.17 4.35 32.52
0.08 2.17 2.88






0.08 2.17 1.11
0.17 4.35 2.34


















0.08 2.17 1.31
0.17 4.35 4.25
0.08 2.17 7.30


1 0.01 0.01 0.32 0.16
4 0.05 0.04 0.96 0.50
307 4.11 0.25 6.73 5.42
1 0.01 0.01 0.32 0.16
67 0.90 0.33 8.97 4.93
61 0.82 0.17 4.49 2.65
400 5.36 0.55 14.74 10.05
19 0.25 0.02 0.64 0.44
15 0.20 0.01 0.32 0.26
1 0.01 0.01 0.32 0.16
3 0.04 0.02 0.64 0.34
6 0.08 0.05 1.28 0.68
1064 14.25 0.02 0.64 7.44
3571 47.81 0.61 16.35 32.08
3 0.04 0.04 0.96 0.50
3 0.04 0.02 0.64 0.34
2 0.03 0.01 0.32 0.17
77 1.03 0.26 7.05 4.04
3 0.04 0.02 0.64 0.34
'2 0.03 0.02 0.64 0.34
6 0.08 0.02 0.64 0.36
1465 19.61 0.74 19.87 19.74
22 0.29 0.10 2.56 1.42
2 0.03 0.02 0.64 0.33
3 0.04 0.01 0.32 0.18
1 0.01 0.01 0.32 0.16
2 0.03 0.02 0.64 0.33
1 0.01 0.01 0.32 0.16
2 0.03 0.02 0.64 0.33
15 0.20 0.01 0.32 0.26
1 0.01 0.01 0.32 0.16
1 0.01 0.01 0.32 0.16
1 0.01 0.01 0.32 0.16
3 0.04 0.01 0.32 0.18
2 0.03 0.01 0.32 0.18
6 0.08 0.01 0.32 0.20
2 0.03 0.01 0.32 0.18
8 0.11 0.01 0.32 0.21
73 0.98 0.02 0.64 0.81
218 2.92 0.01 0.32 1.62
18 0.24 0.04 0.96 0.60
7 0.09 0.08 2.24 1.16


100 100 7469 100 100 100


___


__


_~~_~


TOTAL 1753 100

















Table A-5. Plant population structure on experimental sites, August 9, 1983.


Site 3 Site 6 Site..... 7--


Species


NO RO FREQ RF IMP NO RO FREQ RF IMP NO RD FREQ


Aeschynamene amerIcana
Bacchsrls snaustlfolla
Boahmerla cylindrica
Cyperus spp.
Dulchlum arundlnaceum
El ocharls baldwlnll
Erlocaulon compressumr
Eupator um cap I Itol lum
Eupatorlu perfollatum
Hydrocotyle umbellata
Indliofera spp.
Juncus repn
Ludwlla spp.
Lyonma lucida
Panlcum hemitamono
Panlcum spp. (11)
Panlcum spp. (12)
Panicum spp. (03)
Paspalum urvillil
Polygonui punctatum
uercuS spp.
Rhexla spp.
Rubus spp.
Saeltterla lanclfolla
SalIx carol Inlana
Saururus cernuus
ScIrpus callfornlcus
Sesbania vesicaria
Sal lax aurlculata
Stylosanthes biflora
Unknovn Al
Unknown A2
Unknown A3
Unknown A4
Unknown A5
Unknown A6
Unknown A7
Unknown AS
Unknown A9
Unknown A10
Unknown All
Unknown A12
Unknown A13
Unknown mushroan
Vacclnlua crasslfollum


4 0.41 0.17 3.39 1.90 -
1 0.10 0.08 1.69 0.90 -- -

2 0.21 0.08 1.69 0.95 -- --



69 7.10 0.67 13.56 10.33 47 4.83 0.67 15.09 9.96 154 8.94 1.00
I 0.10 0.08 1.69 0.90 -- -- -

9 0.93 0.33 6.78 3.86 26 2.67 0.58 13.21 7.94 5 0.29 0.33



103 10.60 0.50 10.17 10.39 27 2.77 0.33 7.55 5.16 50 2.90 0.75
235 24.18 0.67 13.56 18.87 155 15.93 0.75 16.98 16.46 163 9.46 0.92


55 5.66 0.67 13.55 9.61 17 1.75 0.50 11.32 6.54 58 3.37 0.67
424 43.62 0.50 10.17 26.90 646 66.39 0.75 16.98 41.69 1238 71.85 1.00


1 0.10 0.08 1.69 0.90 0.06 0.08
-- 1 0.06 0.17


S -- -- -- 1 0.06 0.08
63 6.48 0.75 15.25 10.87 52 5.34 0.67 15.09 10.22 46 2.67 0.92



1 0.10 0.08 1.69 0.90 -- 1 0.06 0.08
-- 5 0.29 0.17
1 0.10 0.08 1.69 0.90 -- --
2 0.21 0.08 1.69 0.95 -
1 0.10 0.08 1.69 0.90 -- -
-- 1 0.10 0.08 1.89 1.00 -
-- -- 2 0.21 0.08 1.89 1.05
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. ..- -




.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ....- .. .-


100 100 973 100 100 100 1723 100


RF IMP


16.22 12.58


5.41 2.85



12.16 7.53
14.86 12.16


12.16 7.77
16.22 44.04


1.35 0.71
1.35 0.71


1.35 0.71
14.86 8.77



1.35 0.71
2.70 1.50















100 100


--------------------------------


TOTAL 972 100















Table A-5. (continued.)


Site 8 Site 9 Site 10

Species NO RD FREQ RF IMP NO RD FREQ RF IMP NO RD FREQ Rf IMP


Aaschynomene amerlcana
Bacchar l angustifolla
Boehmerle cylindrica
CyperS spp.
Dullchlum arundinaceum
Eleocharls baldwlnll
Erlocaulon compressum
Eupatorlum capllIfollum
Eupatorlum pertollatum
Hydrocotyle umbellate
Indlgofera spp.
Juncus rapens
Ludslpla spp.
Lronia luclda
Panicum hemltomon
Panlcum spp. (11)
Panlcun spp. (f2)
Panicum spp. (13)
Paspalum urvllelI
PolySonum punctatum
Qurcus spp.
Rhexia spp.
Rubus spp.
Saelttarla lanclfolla
SalIx carollnlana
Saururus cernuus
Sclrpus californlcus
Sesbanla veslcarla
Smllax aurlculata
Stylosanthes blflora
Unknown Al
Unknown A2
Unknown A3
Unknown A4
Unknown AS
Unknown A6
Unknown A7
Unknown AS
Unknown A9
Unknown AID
Unknown All
Unknown A12
Unknown A13
Unknown mushroom
Vacclnlum crasslfollum


2 0.24 0.17
2 0.24 0.17
3 0.36 0.17

3 0.36 0.08

1 0.12 0.08
62 7.46 0.92





1 0.12 0.08

.16 1.93 0.25
137 16.49 1.00


22 2.66 0.50
553 66.55 1.00
2 0.24 0.08





2 0.24 0.08

21 2.53 0.58

4 0.48 0.25


3.08
3.08
3.08

1.54
-







1.54

4.62
18.46
.--






9.23
18.46
1.54





1.54

10.77

4.62


1.66 16 2.00 0.42
1.66 --
1.72 5 0.62 0.08

0.95 --
-- 32 4.00 0.33
0.83 --
12.19 7 0.87 0.25
-- 4 0.50 0.25
S 4 0.50 0.08
8 1.00 0.25
9 1.12 0.42
0.83 8 1.00 0.25

3.28 -- -- --
17.48 297 37.08 0.92
-- 3 0.37 0.25

5.95 160 19.98 0.92
42.51 101 12.61 0.58
0.89 -- -
-- 2 0.25 0.08




0.89 5 0.62 0.08

6.65 129 16.10 0.67

2.55 8 1.00 0.33
-- 3 0.37 0.08


6.67 4.34 8 1.74 0.17

1.33 0.98 -- -
-- 25 5.42 0.42
-- -- I 0.22 0.08
5.33 4.67 33 7.16 0.75

4.00 2.44 3 0.65 0.17
4.00 2.25 --
1.33 0.92 -
4.00 2.50 1 0.22 0.08
6.67 3.90 14 3.04 0.42
4.00 2.50 9 1.95 0.42
-- 1 0.22 0.08

14.67 25.88 -
4.00 2.19 -
-- 8 1.74 0.25
14.67 17.33 85 18.44 0.75
9.33 10.97 175 37.96 1.00
-- -- I 0.22 0.08
1.33 0.79 --


-- 2 0.43 0.17
1.33 0.98 --

10.67 13.39 75 16.27 0.92
2 0.43 0.17
5.33 3.17 -- -
1.33 0.85 -












0.22 0.08
15 .25 0.25
1 0.22 0.08
1 0.22 0.08

100 100 461 100


2.56


6.41
1.28
11.54

2.56


1.28
6.41
6.41
1.28
-



3.85
11.54
16.66
1.28



2.56


14.20
2.56
-

--











1.28
3.85
1.28
1.28


2.15


5.92
0.75
9.35

1.61


0.75
4.73
4.18
0.75

-

2.80
14.99
27.31
0.75
--



1.50


15.19
1.50














0.75
3.55
0.75
0.75


__


TOTAL 831 100


100 100 801 100


100 100















Table A-5. (continued.)


Control Site Site Total

Species fO RD FREQ Rf IMP NO RD FREQ RF IMP


Aes hynomene americana
Baccharlas ngustlfolla
Boehmerla cyl ndrlca
Cyprus spp.
Du Ichlum arundinaceum
Eleocharls baldwlnll
Erlocaulon compressum
Eupatorlum caplitifollum
Eupatorlum perfollatum
Hydrocotyle umbellata
Indlqofera spp.
Juncus repens
Ludwlgia spp.
Lyonia luclda
Panicum hemitomon
Panlcum spp. (Il)
Penlcum spp. (I2)
Panlcum spp. (13)
Paspalu urvlllel
Polygonum punctatu
Quercus pp.
Rhexia spp.
Rubus spp.
Saglttarla fanclfolla
Sallx carolinlana
Saururus cernuus
Scirpus californicus
Sesbania vesicarla
Smllax aurlculata
Stylosanthes biflora
Unknown Al
Unknown A2
Unknown A3
Unknown A4
Unknown A5
Unknown A6
Unknown A7
Unknown A8
Unknown A9
Unknown AIO
Unknown A1t
Unknown A12
Unknown A13
known mushroom
Vacclnlum crassifollum

TOTAL


17 2.66 0.33 6.78 4.72 47 0.73 0.18 3.25 1.99
2 0.31 0.17 3.39 1.85 5 0.08 0.06 1.08 0.58
8 0.13 0.04 0.65 0.39
27 0.42 0.07 1.30 0.86
-- 4 0.06 0.02 0.43 0.25
65 1.02 0.15 2.81 1.92
1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
5 0.78 0.25 5.08 2.93 347 5.42 0.56 10.17 7.80
-- 5 0.08 0.05 0.87 0.48
-- -- -- 4 0.06 0.01 0.22 0.14
40 6.27 0.58 11.86 9.07 89 1.39 0.31 5.63 3.51
-- 23 0.36 0.12 2.16 1.26
20 3.13 0.17 3.39 3.26 38 0.59 0.13 2.38 1.49
1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
196 3.06 0.26 4.76 3.91
184 28.84 0.75 15.25 22.05 1171 18.30 0.26 12.99 15.51
-- 3 0.05 0.04 0.65 0.35
-- 8 0.13 0.04 0.65 0.39
71 11.03 0.75 15.25 13.20 468 7.31 0.69 12.55 9.93
40 6.27 0.42 8.47 7.37 3177 49.65 0.75 13.64 31.65
-- 3 0.05 0.02 0.43 0.24
2 0.03 0.01 0.22 0.13
2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
-- 2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
7 0.11 0.02 0.43 0.27
1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
222 35.80 0.92 18.64 27.22 608 9.50 0.77 14.07 11.79
-- 2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
12 0.19 0.08 1.52 0.86
3 0.05 0.01 0.22 0.14
2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
5 0.08 0.02 0.43 0.25
1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
2 0.03 0.01 0.22 0.13
1 0.16 0.08 1.69 0.93 2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
-- -- 1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
2 0.03 0.01 0.22 0.13
9 1.41 0.17 3.39 2.40 9 0.14 0.02 0.43 0.29
8 1.25 0.17 3.39 2.32 8 0.13 0.02 0.43 0.28
19 2.98 0.17 3.39 3.19 9 0.30 0.02 0.43 0.37
1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
15 0.23 0.04 0.65 0.44
-- 1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12

i3A l8nr t8 .10 0.0. 0


0 01 100 6399 100 100 100














Table A-6. Plant population structure on experimental sites, October 21, 1983.


S....it.e 3 slte 6 Site 7

Species N RD FREQ RF IMP NO RD FREQ RF IMP NO RD FREQ RF IMP


Aeschynomene americana 13 1.48 0.50 9.37 5.42 1 0.15 0.08 1.66 0.90 I 0.09 0.08 1.69 0.89
Andropogon gerardl -- -
Baccharls anqustfolla -
Boehmerla cylindrica -- -- -- -
Cassia fasciculata -- -- -- -
Cephalanthus occldentalIs 2 0.22 0.17 3.12 1.67 -
Coreopsls leavenorth II - -- -- -
Crotalarla spp. -- -- -- -- 2 0.18 0.17 3.39 1.78
Cyperus haspan -- -- -- -- 4 0.36 0.17 3.39 1.87
Cyprus spp. -- -- -- -- -- -- I 1.37 0.50 10.17 5.77
DOpltarla sanqulnalls 171 18.90 0.42 7.81 13.35 193 29.47 0.58 11.67 20.57 -
OulIchlum arundlnaceum 5 0.55 0.25 6.25 3.40 5 0.76 0.17 3.33 2.04 -
Eleocharls baldwlnll 1 0.11 0.08 1.56 0.83 2 0.31 0.08 1.66 0.96 --
Eupatorlum caplll follum 66 7.29 0.75 12.50 9.89 32 4.88 0.75 13.33 9.10 133 12.14 1.00 20.33 16.24
Heterotheca subaxlllarls I 0.11 0.08 1.56 0.83 1 0.15 0.08 1.66 0.90 -- -
Hydrocotyle umbellata -- -
Hyptls alata -- -
Indliofera hirsute 3 0.33 0.33 4.69 2.51 -- -
Indl5ofera spp. -- -- -- 26 3.97 0.75 13.33 8.65 2 0.18 0.08 1.69 0.93
Juncus -- -repens -- -
Juncus spp. -- --
Ludwlia spp. -- -- -- -- -- -- -
Myrice carfera -- -- -- 1 0.15 0.08 1.66 0.90 -
Panicum bartowense 184 20.73 1.00 18.74 19.73 22 3.36 0.83 16.66 9.74 155 14.14 0.75 13.56 13.85
Pan Icum commutatum -
PanIcum dlchotomlflorum 44 4.86 0.42 7.81 6.33 48 7.33 0.58 11.67 9.50 56 5.10 0.75 13.56 9.33
Paspalun urvlllel -- -- -- --
Polygonum punctatum 361 41.02 0.75 12.50 26.76 310 47.33 0.75 13.33 30.33 699 63.78 1.00 20.33 42.05
Quercus app. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
Rhus spp. 1 0.11 0.08 1.56 0.83 -
Sagittarla lanclfoa -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 0.27 0.08 1.69 0.98
Saururus cernuus -- -
ScIrpus ca l forn cus --
Sesbanla vesicarla 27 3.07 0.58 10.94 7.01 11 1.68 0.33 6.67 4.17 25 2.28 0.42 8.47 5.37
Smnllax aurculta -- -- -- -- -- 0.09 0.08 1.69 0.89
Stylos nthes bf lora -
Unknown B1 -- -- 1 15 0.08 1.66 0.90 --
Unknown 82 1 0.11 0.08 1.56 0.83 -- -- -- -
Unknown 83 -- 2 0.31 0.08 1.66 0.9 -
Unknown 4 -- -- -- -- -
Unknown 5 -
Unknown B6- -- -

TOTAL 880 100 100 100 655 100 100 100 1096 100 100 100
















Table A-6. (continued.)
~ri rr r m r~Prsu~-;I,~rc rrll_ ~ ; -^ -------T----AtJ-- ______ -
Site 8 Site 9 Site 10

Species NO RD FREQ RF IMP NO RD FREQ RF IMP NO RD FREO RF IMP


Aeschynmene americana -- 15 1.52 0.50 8.22 4.87 4 0.64 0.17 2.94 1.79
Andropogon e rard -- -- 2 0.20 0.08 1.37 0.78 2 0.32 0.08 1.47 0.89
Bacchar Is anustlfolla 2 0.21 0.17 2.82 1.51 -- -- -- -
Boehmeria cylindrica -- -- -- -- 2 0.20 0.17 2.74 1.47 --
Cassia fasclculata -
Cephalanthus occidental Is -- -- -- --
CoreopsIs I avenvorth l -- -- -- 4 0.41 0.08 1.37 0.89 -
Crotalarla spp. -- -- ---- -
Cype us haspan 2 0.21 0.08 1.41 0.81 -- -- --
Cyperus spp. I 0.11 0.08 1.41 0.76 -
Dpltaria sangulnal Is 3 0.32 0.08 1.41 0.86 -- -- -
Dullchlum around naceum -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 0.32 0. 17 2.94 1.63
Eleocharls baldwinll -- -- -- -- -- 54 5.49 0.33 5.48 5.48 123 19.65 0.50 8.82 14.23
Eupatorlum capilllfollum 61 6.32 1.00 16.90 11.61 7 0.71 0.25 4.11 2.41 1 0.16 0.08 1.47 0.81
Heterotheca subaxillarls -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Hydrocotyle umbellata -- -- 11 1.12 0.08 1.37 1.25 -
Hyptis alata 1 0.11 0.08 1.41 0.76 3 0.30 0.08 1.37 0.83 -
Indlgofera hirsute -- -
Indloofera spp. -- -- -- ----
Juncus repens 31 3.26 0.08 1.41 2.33 2 0.20 0.17 2.74 1.47 7 1.12 0.25 4.41 2.76
Juncus spp. 2 0.21 0.08 1.41 0.81 -- -- -- -- -- -
Ludwigle spp. -- -- -- -- 1 0.10 0.08 1.37 1.47 3 0.48 0.17 2.94 1.71
Myrica celfera 1 0.11 0.08 1.41 0.76 -- -- -- -- -- --
Panicum bartowense 60 6.32 0.75 11.27 8.79 29 2.95 0.58 9.59 6.27 95 15.17 1.00 17.65 16.41
Pancum commutatum -- -- 23 2.34 0.33 5.48 3.91 11 1.76 0.33 5.88 3.82
Panlcum dichotomiflorum 71 7.47 0.83 14.08 10.77 62 6.30 0.33 5.48 5.89 1 0.16 0.08 1.47 0.81
Paspalum urvlllel 84 8.84 0.92 15.49 12.16 413 41.97 0.83 13.70 27.84 244 38.98 0.83 14.71 26.84
Polygonum punctatum 615 64.74 1.00 16.90 40.82 231 23.48 0.75 12.33 17.90 20 3.19 0.42 7.35 5.27
uercus spp. -- -- -- 1 0.10 0.08 1.37 0.73 ---
Rhus spp. -- --
Sagittarla lanclfolla -- -- -- --
Saururus cernuus 2 0.21 0.08 1.41 0.81 11 1.12 0.25 4.11 2.61 -- -- -
Sclrpus cal fornicus -- -- 13 1.32 0.42 6.85 4.08 31 4.95 0.58 10.29 7.62
Sesbanla veslcaria 8 0.84 0.25 4.23 2.53 100 10.16 0.67 10.96 10.56 78 12.45 0.75 13.24 12.85
Smllax auriculata 5 0.53 0.33 5.63 3.08 -- -- -- -- 4 0.64 0.25 4.41 2.52
Stylosanthes blflora -- -- -
Unknown B 8- -- -- -
Unknown 2 -- -8 -- -- -
Unknown 83 -
Unknown 84 1 0.11 0.08 1.41 0.76 -
Unknown B5- -- -- -. -
Unknown 86 -- -

TOTAL 950 100 100 100 984 100 100 100 626 100 100 100




0.
14















Table A-6. (continued.)


Species


Control Site

NO RD FREQ RF


Aeschynomen amerIcana 11 1.09 0.33 5.71
AndropoQon rard- -- -- --
Baccharls anustlfolla 5 4.98 0.33 5.71
Boe4merla cylIndrca -- --
Cassia fasclculata 155 15.42 0.92 15.71
Cephalanthus occidentalis -- -- --
Coreopsis leavenworthl I-- -
Crotalarla spp. -
Cyperus haen
Cyprus spp. -
Olgltarla sanquInalls 108 10.75 0.33 5.71
Dul chlum arundinaceum -- -
Eleocharls baldwlnll 1 0.01 0.08 1.43
Eupatorlum call follum 7 0.07 0.33 5.71
Heterotheca subax llarls -- -- -
Hydrocotyle umbellata -
Hyptli alata --
Indlgofera hirsute --
Indlgofera spp. 46 4.58 0.67 11.43
Juncus reopens -- -
Juncus spp. -- -
Ludwlgla spp. 148 14.72 0.17 2.86
Myrica cerifera -- -
Panicum bartowense 416 41.39 0.92 15.71
Panlcum commutatum 1 0.01 0.08 1.43
Panicum dlchotomiflorum 13 1.29 0.25 4.29
Paspalum urvlllel 3 0.03 0.25 4.29
Polygonum punctatum 55 5.47 0.50 8.57
Quercus spp. -- -- -- --
Rhus spp. -
Sagittaria lancifolla -
Saururus cernuus -
Scirpus callfornlcus 23 2.29 0.33 5.71
Sesbania vesicarla -- -- -- --
Smilax auriculata -
Stylosanthes blflora 6 0.06 0.17 2.86
Unknown 81 -- -- -- --
Unknown 82 -
Unknown 83 --
Unknown 84 -
Unknown 85 I 0.01 0.08 1.43
Unknown 86 6 0.06 0.08 1.43


Site Total

IMP NO RD FREQ Rf IMP


3.40 45 0.73 0.24 4.30 2.52
-- 4 0.06 0.02 0.43 0.25
5.34 7 0.11 0.07 1.29 0.70
-- 2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
15.56 155 2.50 0.13 2.37 2.44
-- 2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
-- 4 0.06 0.01 0.22 0.14
2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
6 0.10 0.04 0.65 0.37
16 0.26 0.83 1.51 0.88
8.23 475 7.67 0.20 3.66 5.15
-- 12 0.19 0.10 1.72 0.95
0.72 181 2.92 0.15 2.80 2.86
2.89 307 4.95 0.57 10.32 7.63
-- 2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
II 0.18 0.01 0.22 0.20
4 0.06 0.02 0.43 0.25
-- 3 0.05 0.04 0.65 0.35
8.00 74 1.19 0.20 3.66 2.42
-- 40 0.65 0.07 1.29 0.97
-- 2 0.03 0.01 0.22 0.13
8.79 152 2.45 0.06 1.08 1.76
-- 2 0.03 0.02 0.43 0.23
28.55 961 15.51 0.81 14.62 15.06
0.72 35 0.56 0.11 1.94 1.23
2.79 295 4.76 0.45 8.17 6.46
2.16 744 12.01 0.40 7.31 9.66
7.02 2291 36.98 0.71 12.90 24.94
1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
-- 1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
3 0.05 0.01 0.22 0.14
13 0.01 0.05 0.86 0.53
4.00 67 1.08 0.19 3.44 2.26
-- 249 4.02 0.43 7.74 5.88
-- 10 0.16 0.10 1.72 0.94
1.46 6 0.10 0.02 0.43 0.26
-- 1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
1 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
2 0.03 0.01 0.22 0.13
-- 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.12
0.72 1 0.01 0.01 0.22 0.12
0.74 6 0.10 0.01 0.22 0.16


TOTA 1005_ _ __ _I_ 100 100 00 696 10 10 10


TOTAL


IOn5 100 inn ion 6196 mnn


inn 100










Table A-7.


Plant population structure in germination trays under controlled
conditions, February 3, 1983.


Species RD FREQ RF IMP


Baccharis angustifolia
Cassia fasciculata -
Cyperus sp.
Dulichium arundinaceum -- -- -
Eleocharis baldwinii 14.61 0.71 50.00 32.31

Eupatorium capillifolium -- -- --
Ludwigia spp. -
Panicum spp. -- -- -- -
Polygonum punctatum 66.85 0.29 20.00 43.43
Saururus cernuus -- -- -

Sesbania exaltata --
Solaum spp. -
Sphagnum*
Trifolium spp. -
Ulmus spp. -- -- -- --

Unknown composite A 6.18 0.29 20.00 13.09
Unknown composite B -- -- -- --
Unknown composite C -- -- -- --
Unknown grass A 12.36 0.14 10.00 11.18
Unknown grass 1 -- -- -- -

Unknown grass 2 --
Unknown grass 3 ---
Unknown grass 4 ---
Unknown herb A --
Unknown mint --

Woodwardia virginiana


*Sphagnum coverage 100% of 2 samples.

RD = Relative Density: (Individuals of
x 100.

FREQ = Frequency: (Number of points at
sampled).


species/total individuals of all species)


which species occur/total number of points


RF = Relative Frequency: (Frequency value for species/total frequency value for
all species) x 100.

IMP = Importance Value: (Relative density + relative frequency for all species/2)
x 100.










Table A-8. Plant population structure in germination trays under controlled
conditions, May 12, 1983.



Species RD FREQ RF IMP


Baccharis angustifolia 0.43 0.22 4.26 2.35
Cassia fasciculata 1.28 0.11 2.13 1.71
Cyperus sp. 0.64 0.22 4.26 2.45
DulicThium arundinaceum 17.31 0.66 12.77 15.04
Eleocharis baldwinii ----

Eupatorium capillifolium 8.33 0.44 8.51 8.42
Ludwigia spp. 0.43 0.22 4.26 2.35
Panicum spp. 0.21 0.11 2.13 1.17
Polygonum punctatum 26.92 0.33 6.38 16.65
Saururus cernuus 1.28 0.33 6.38 3.83

Sesbania exaltata 0.21 0.11 2.13 1.17
Solaum spp. 0.21 0.11 2.13 1.17
Sphagnum*
Trifolium spp. 0.21 0.11 2.13 1.17
Ulmus spp. 14.10 0.55 10.64 12.37

Unknown composite A -- -- -- --
Unknown composite B 0.21 0.11 2.13 1.17
Unknown composite C 0.21 0.11 2.13 1.17
Unknown grass A
Unknown grass 1 12.61 0.22 4.26 8.44

Unknown grass 2 7.91 0.55 10.64 9.28
Unknown grass 3 0.64 0.11 2.13 1.39
Unknown grass 4 0.43 0.11 2.13 1.28
Unknown herb A 3.85 0.22 4.26 4.06
Unknown mint 0.21 0.11 2.13 1.17

Woodwardia virginiana 2.35 0.11 2.13 2.24


*Sphagnum coverage 100% of 2 samples.

RD = Relative Density: (Individuals of
x 100.

FREQ = Frequency: (Number of points at
sampled).


species/total individuals of all species)


which species occur/total number of points


RF = Relative Frequency: (Frequency value for species/total frequency value for
all species) x 100.

IMP = Importance Value: (Relative density + relative frequency for all species/2)
x 100.Importance










Table A-9. Plant population structure
conditions, August 9, 1983.


in germination trays under controlled


Species NO RD FREQ RF IMP


Andropogon spp. 24 7.48 0.66 10.53 9.01
Baccharis angustifolia 1 0.31 0.17 2.63 1.47
Cyperus odoratus 23 7.17 0.66 10.53 8.85
Dulichium arundinaceum 30 9.35 0.33 5.26 7.31
Eleocharis baldwinii 4 1.25 0.17 2.63 1.94

Eupatorium capillifolium 23 7.17 0.50 7.89 7.53
Juncus repens 14 4.36 0.33 5.26 4.81
Ludwigia spp. 7 2.18 0.50 7.89 5.04
Panicum spp. (#1) 11 3.43 0.17 2.63 3.03
Panicum spp. (#2) 72 22.43 0.33 5.26 13.85

Panicum spp. (#3) 2 0.62 0.17 2.63 1.63
Polygonum punctatum 49 15.26 0.33 5.26 10.26
Saururus cernuus 2 0.62 0.17 2.63 1.63
Sesbania vesicaria 1 0.31 0.17 2.63 1.47
Smilax auriculata 8 2.49 0.33 5.26 3.88

Ulmus spp. 26 8.10 0.50 7.89 8.00
Unknown GA-1 1 0.31 0.17 2.63 1.47
Unknown composite 1 1 0.31 0.17 2.63 1.47
Unknown composite 2 1 0.31 -- 2.63 1.47
Woodwardia virginiana 19 5.92 0.17 2.63 4.28
Xyris spp. 2 0.62 0.17 2.63 1.63

TOTAL 321 100 100 100


*Sphagnum coverage 100% of 2 samples.












Table A-10. Blomass (g dry weight) of major species found In experimental plots, May 6, 1983.




Site


Control


3


6


Ind* Total Ind* Total Ind* Total


Ind* Total


Eupatorlum capillifollum

Saururus cernuus

Polygonum punctatum

Unknown grass A

Cassia fasclculata

Unknown herb 0


0.505

0.054

0.017

0.188


31.82

57.46

4.66

40.98


0.465

0.115

0.456

0.012


35.34

1.84

283.18

6.49


0.204

0.146

0.621

0.011


13.06

5.40

540.27

3.311


0.076 14.06


0.444

0.032


389.83

6.21


*Individual = average biomass per individual from 10 sampled.
Total = average blomass per Individual multiplied by number of Individuals In m2 study
plots. Divide total by 12 to calculate blomass In g/m2.



Table A-10. (continued.)




Site


8

Ind* Total


9

Ind* Total


10

Ind* Total


Eupatorlum capillIfollum

Saururus cernuus

Polygonum punctatum

Unknown grass A

Cassia fasclculata

Unknown herb 0


0.097 6.21 0.083 0.332 No blomass
taken



0.988 910.94 0.372 79.98


Spec I es


Species


0.185

0.128

0.564

0.027

0.017

0.188


13.8

3.62

515.215

18.37

4.66

40.98


--


AVER


























Table A-11. Blomass (9 dry weight) of major species found In experimental sites (August 10, 1983).



Site


Control 3 6


Species


7


Ind. Total Ind. Total Ind. Total Ind. Total


Aeschynomene americana
Eleocharls baldwinll
Eupatorlum cap Iilfollum
Indioftera spp.
Juncus repens
Ludirgla spp.
Panicum hemitomon
Panlcum spp. (II)
Panicum spp. (13)
Paspalum urvlllel
Polygonun punctatum
Sesbania vesicarla


.
96.44



3.68

185.85
72.80
3312.91


445.19
1.83


24.31
45.12

58.64
1195.26
595.04


5.33 250.60
1.00 25.92


0.24
0.57

5.25
4.29
12.23


6.37
87.89

78.69
2771.99
635.80


4.22 650.03



0.55 27.50
0.49 79.71


3.62 4486.51
7.50 334.86


*Individual average biomass per Individual from 10 sampled.
Total average biomass per Individual multiple led by number of individuals In m2 study plots. Divide
total by 12 to calculate biomass In g/m2.


Table A-11. (continued.)


Spec Ies


Site

8 9 0T Average Average
per per
Ind. Total Ind. Total Ind. Total Individual Site


Aeschynomene americana -- -- 0.83 13.22 13.13 105.06 6.98 59.14
Eleocharls baldlnll -- -- -- 1.92 63.20 1.92 63.20
Eupatorlum capillifollum 1.57 97.46 5.85 40.92 2.59 7.78 4.34 248.67
Indlgofera spp. -- -- --- -- -- 1.20 41.40
Juncus reopens ---- --- --- 0.93 13.01 0.93 13.01
ud la spp. -- -- -- 2.46 22.13 2.46 22.13
Panlcum hemitomon -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.34 19.39
Panicum spp. (01) 0.39 53.29 0.76 230.18 2.50 429.83 0.70 132.81
Panicum spp. (13) -- --- -- 3.89 31.08 3.89 31.08
Paspalum urvllell 8.67 190.78 3.69 590.08 21.27 1807.78 17.10 485.30
Poly punctatum 11.20 6193.60 4.76 481.16 6.13 18.38 4.95 2174.24
Sesbanla veslcarla --- -- 15.54 2004.66 15.77 1182.60 12.57 1344.31



























Table A-12. Blomass (g dry weight) of major species found in exporimontal sites (October 21, 1983).



Site


Control 3 6


Spec Ies


7


Ind. Total Ind. Total Ind. Total Ind. Total


Olgltarla sanqulnalls 0.18 19.55 1.26 215.12 1.19 229.67 -
Eupatorlum capllljfollum --- -- 9.25 610.37 16.89 540.48 -
Indlgofera spp. 3.96 183.17 -- -- 10.30 267.80 -
Panicum bartowense 4.72 1963.52 3.76 691.29 --- --- 4.09 633.95
Pan cum dlchotomiflorum --- 0.72 31.68 -- 1.85 103.60
Paspalum urvIllel -- -- --
Polygon punctatum --- -- 3.20 1153.40 5.26 1631.22 2.70 1887.30
Sesbanle veslcarla 12.51 1939.05 18.05 487.24 -- -- 32.91 822.75


*Individual average blomass per Individual from 10 sampled.
Total average blomass per Individual multiplied by number of Individuals In m2 study plots. Divide
total by 12 to calculate blomass In g/m2.


Table A-12. (continued.)



Site

8 9 10 Average Average
per per
Species Ind. Total Ind. Total Ind. Total Individual Site


DIitarla sangulna s
Eupatorlum capllllfollum
Indlofera spp.
Pan cum bartowense
Panlcum dichotomlflorum
Paspalum urvillel
Polygonum punctatum
Sesbanla veslcarla


10.26
1-
13.34


6.89


626.10

800.40


4237.35


-- -- -- 0.88
--- --- --- 12.13
--- --- 7.14
-- 28.64 2739.80 10.95
6.35 393.70 --- -- 2.97
-- -- 1.11 269.62 1.11
15.75 3638.25 --- --- 6.76
30.32 3032.20 30.25 2359.50 24.81


154.78
592.32
225.49
1365.79
176.33
269.62
2509.38
1728.15


---- --- --



















Table A-13. Height of tree species planted on experimental sites and other reclamation
sites.



Liquidambar
Nyssa biflora Taxodium distichum styraciflua

Average Average Average
Site, Date Measured Number height, cm Number height, cm Number height, cm


EXPERIMENTAL SITES Planted 02/02/83 Planted 02/23/83 Planted 02/23/83

3 (03/30/83) 15 30.07 23 56.22 26 32.65
(10/21/83) 8 40.75 23 61.26 25 39.64

6 (03/30/83) 20 19.35 22 56.55 25 30.68
(10/21/83) 9 26.89 19 67.25 28 39.18

*7 (03/30/83) 37 17.38 21 56.67 37 26.86
(10/21/83) 5 23.8 15 48.2 25 30.24

8 (03/30/83) 19 26.53 21 52.52 30 23.93
(10/21/83) 2 27.5 19 64.74 26 34.69

9 (03/30/83) 19 19.26 19 62.79 25 22.92
(10/21/83) 9 24.22 18 77.55 21 32.81

10 (03/30/83) 17 29.94 20 51.25 23 22.91
(10/21/83) 0 --- 21 63.38 18 25.44

RECLAMATION SITES

Planted 1981, 1982

A (05/13/83) -- --- 30 118.83 8 188.13
(10/21/83) -- --- 30 141.87 8 235.63

Planted 04/82

B (05/13/83) -- 30 59.92 --
(10/21/83) -- 22 75.95

Planted 02/82

tC (05/13/83) -- --- 45 90.29
(10/21/83) -- 26 98.42

Planted 01/83

0 (05/13/83) -- 60 46.49
(10/21/83) -- --- 54 54.51


*Reduced growth
tReduced growth
destruction.


of species in this plot due to animal grazing destruction.
of species in this plot due to flooding conditions and animal grazing










Table A-14.


Monthly rainfall near experimental sites
(rainfall data from Occidental Chemical
Company).


Rainfall

Month in. cm.


January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

TOTAL


5.83

4.72

6.34

6.06

1.24

9.49

4.17

3.85

7.60

1.43

4.19

6.14

61.06


14.81

11.99

16.10

15.39

3.15

24.10

10.59

9.78

19.30

3.63

10.64

15.60

155.09




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs