“a...

I? :3

.4...
x lo...

5 z. x

L :2! 3. .2 w:

‘ . l... .532
2.3.9.6. .

5...... x
. 3:.“
1": l...1;|

 

rm

. . ;
.3 .
51%

 

 

 

 

>4 351? 1..
‘ ~tmunmflfi

2 3g,” . 2
~§2w Rwy“
.. ”an? any??? . .

 

 

 

 

‘ .l ,
V 114 I
up.» a. .1... a

A.
4K: 1. .1! r 3.9!.
6.x: .1 )1 .. (Ivar. 4"

1.5.!

31.. “n:

. . ‘ I i. .. a . s .; .w... 5... .W M . :5. h. 5.35 .v .15? .n.
a fig? Emémmfififi «if a u .ufifiifi .3? #5 <§uiég aw?
Sufi... ” W... .5... ‘ . $.21 ,.. . .a . A . . ‘

 

 

‘ 4"
8.095
(35/4443

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

EFFECTS OF SALINITY ON THE BIOTA OF NATURAL AND
CREATED WETLAND COMMUNITIES

presented by

CYNTHIA KOPPEN HODGES

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

MS. degree in ZOOLOGY

 

 

27¢ moi/4’:

Major Professor’s Signature

MW

/
Date

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

LIBRARIES
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
EAST LANSING, MICH 48824—1048

fl,._.._.-.-—.-.—._--.-o-n-o-~ —

..__

a. —« r V —-—~'- r—fi

 

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this ched<out from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/05 c:/CIFIC/DateDue.indd-p.15

EFFECTS OF SALINITY ON THE BIOTA OF NATURAL AND CREATED
WETLAND COMMUNITIES

By

Cynthia Koppen Hodges

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fiilfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTERS OF SCIENCE
Department of Zoology

2005

ABSTRACT

EFFECTS OF SALINITY ON THE BIOTA OF NATURAL AND CREATED
WETLAND COMMUNITIES

By
Cynthia Koppen Hodges

Natural saline wetlands are rare in the temperate regions of the United States. In
Michigan, only two high quality saline wetlands are known to exist. One of the
remaining wetlands located near the Maple River in Clinton County, Michigan was
surveyed in this study. This unique habitat supported two species of native halophytic
plant species, Schoenoplectus americanus and Eleocharis parvula, which are considered
extremely threatened in Michigan. E. parvula was present at the seep only in the second
year, but S. americanus occupied an area of 3200 m2 and was positively correlated to
conductivity, Na, CI and depth to water table, but negatively associated with reactive
phosphorus, nitrate and spring water depth.

The created saline wetland had three connected ponds with increasing salinity in
each pond. The pond with the greatest diversity of invertebrates and algae had the least
salinity. Phragmites australis was the most common emergent plant around the created
wetland and birds were the most common vertebrates present.

To increase the diversity at the created wetland, four emergent salt tolerant plants,
S. americanus, S. pungens, P. australis and T ypha angustifolia were transplanted to the
created saline wetland and a control fresh water wetland (except for P. australis). All
species grew well at the control wetland, but only S. americanus increased in number of

stems at the created saline wetland.

Dedicated to my husband, Charles

For all his love and encouragement

And to Peter Alexander, your short
Time on earth changed our lives!

We love you, your Mom and Dad

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Thomas Burton and my committee, Dr.
Thomas Voice and Dr. Donald Hall for their help and advice. I would also like to thank
Xianda Zhao, Don Uzarski, John Genet, and Ryan Otter for their help if the field. Finally

I would like to thank the Dow Chemical Company for their financial support.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ vii

LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................... viii

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1
A HISTORY OF SALT ....................................................................................... 1
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY ............................................................................... 7
WORKS CITED .................................................................................................. 9

CHAPTER 2

SURVEY OF A NATURAL SALT SEEP WETLAND IN RELATION TO WATER

CHEMISTRY ............................................................................................................... l 1
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. l 1
METHODS ........................................................................................................ 14
RESULTS ......................................................................................................... 16
DISCUSSION ................................................................................................... 20
WORKS CITED ................................................................................................ 28
TABLES AND FIGURES ................................................................................. 31

CHAPTER 3

WATER CHEMISTRY AND BIOTA OF A BRINE POND COMPLEX IN MIDLAND,

MICHIGAN .................................................................................................................. 57
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 57
METHODS AND MATERIALS ....................................................................... 59
RESULTS ......................................................................................................... 61
DISCUSSION ................................................................................................... 6S
WORKS CITED ................................................................................................ 71
TABLES AND FIGURES ................................................................................. 74

CHAPTER 4

GROWTH OF SALT TOLERANT PLANTS IN A BRINE AND STORM WATER

POND IN MICHIGAN .................................................................................................. 80
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 80
METHODS AND MATERIALS ....................................................................... 81
RESULTS ......................................................................................................... 86
DISCUSSION ................................................................................................... 9O
WORKS CITED ................................................................................................ 96
TABLES AND FIGURES ................................................................................. 97

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................... l 10

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

APPENDIX A

SALT TOLERANT WETLAND PLANTS OF MICHIGAN ....................................... 113
APPENDDI B
LIST OF PLANT SPECIES AT THE MAPLE RIVER SALT SEEP ........................... 127

LIST OF TABLES

CHAPTER 2
Table l. The dominant and common species found at the Maple River salt seep ............ 31
Table 2. Spearman rank correlations for average stem counts/m2 and relative
abundance .................................................................................................................... 32
Table 3. The means (isd) for environmental factors ...................................................... 34
Table 4. Spearman rank correlations comparing environmental factors .......................... 35
Table 5. Spearman rank correlations for average stem counts/m2 and relative
abundance ................................................................................................................ 36
Table 6. Regression equations and variance ................................................................... 38
CHAPTER 3
Table 1. Water chemistry of the individual ponds in the Dow brine pond complex ........ 74
Table 2. Algal species collected ..................................................................................... 75
Table 3. The order and families of macroinvertebrates ................................................... 76
Table 4. Vertebrates found at the Dow pond .................................................................. 77
CHAPTER 4
Table 1. Water chemistry data from the Dow pond, MSU pond and the Maple River salt
seep ......................................................................................................................... 97
Table 2. Total number of live stems ............................................................................... 97
Table 3. Initial average stem number per plug and stem lengths per plug ....................... 97
Table 4. The average number of stems per plug and stems lengths per plug .................. 98

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

CHAPTER 2

Figure 1a. Location of the Maple River salt seep ........................................................... 39
Figure lb. The Maple River salt seep wetland ............................................................... 40
Figure 2. Relative abundances for 2000 of major plant species ...................................... 41
Figure 3. Relative abundances for 2001 of major plant species ...................................... 42
Figure 4. Average stem count per m2 for S. mnericams ................... , .............................. 43
Figure 5. Average stem count per m2 for M. arvensis ..................................................... 44
Figure 6. Average stem count per m2 for A. lanceolatus ................................................. 45
Figure 7. Average stem count per m2 for Twha spp. ..................................................... 46
Figure 8. Average stem count per m2 for other species ................................................... 47
Figure 9. Total number of species found ........................................................................ 48
Figure 10. The spring and summer conductivities .......................................................... 49
Figure 11. The CI and Ca concentrations ....................................................................... 50
Figure 12. The alkalinity and Na concentrations ............................................................ 51
Figure 13. The K and NO3-N concentrations ................................................................. 52
Figure 14. The NH4-N and ortho-P concentrations ........................................................ 53
Figure 15. The depth of the water table .......................................................................... 54
Figure 16. The temperature and pH ............................................................................... 55
Figure 16. Environmental factors that are correlated ...................................................... 56
CHAPTER 3

Figure 1. Layout of the Dow pond complex ................................................................... 78
Figure 2. Unknown Cymbella spp .................................................................................. 79

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

CHAPTER 4

Figure 1. Experimental plot locations at the brine pond complex ................................... 99
Figure 2. The MSU pond with locations of plots .......................................................... 100
Figure 3. The individual plot design ............................................................................ 101
Figure 4. Plot layout showing the random placement ................................................... 101

Figure 5. Total number of living stems per sampling date for T who mgust'y'olia ........ 102
Figure 6. Average stem lengths per plug for the whole population of II wrgusufolia 102
Figure 7. Total number of live stems per sampling date for Schoenoplectus americanus103
Figure 8. Average stem lengths per plug for the whole population of S americanus.... 103
Figure 9. Box plot comparing average stem lengths ..................................................... 104
Figure 10. Total number of live stems per sampling date for SchoenoplecMspungens. 104
Figure 11. Average stem lengths per plug for the whole population of S. pungens ....... 105
Figure 12. Total number of live stems per sampling date for P. australis ..................... 105
Figure 13. Average stem lengths per plug for the whole population of P. auslmlis ...... 106

Figure 14. Average number live stems per plug per plot for 72 mgustzfolia at the MSU
pond ............................................................................................................................ 106

Figure 15. Average number of live stems per plug per plot for I angusafolia at the Dow
pond ............................................................................................................................ 107

Figure 16. Average stem lengths per plug per plot for T. angusnfolia at the Dow pond 107
Figure 17. Average stem lengths per plug per plot for S. wnericanus at the MSU pond 108

Figure 18. Average number of live stems per plug per plot for S. wnericanus at the Dow
pond ...................................................................................................................... 108

Figure 19. Average stem lengths per plug per plot for S. pungens at the MSU pond ..... 109

Chapter 1: Introduction
LBW

Salt, specifically sodium chloride (NaCl), also known as table salt, or rock salt is
an integrated part of most cultures, societies and habitats on earth. Salt and its ionic form
of Na + and C1- are important physiologically, economically, environmentally and
historically.

Physiology: Na+ and Cl- both play vital roles in the human body and are two of the
major mineral elements that compose the majority of the human body (V ander et al.
1998). Sodium helps maintain water balance and is important in the normal firnctioning
of cell and cell membrane transport, nerve firnction, kidney function and digestion
(Vander et al. 1998). Chloride is important for cell homeostasis, cell transport and neural
functioning (Vander et al. 1998).

Excess sodium in the diet, which is very prevalent in the United States
(MacGregor and Wardener 1998), may partly be responsible for hypertension, which can
damage the heart, kidneys and brain (Vander et al. 1998). In addition, high sodium may
leach calcium from the bones to be used in the kidneys for balancing ions and may
increase risk of osteoporosis and kidney stones (MacGregor and Wardener 1998).
Sodium causes the bronchioles to be more reactive which may increase asthma
(MacGregor and Wardener 1998).

Economics: Salt is an important natural resource used for many purposes. Michigan is
one of the leading suppliers in the United States (Dorr and Eschman 1988, Heinrich
1976) and is estimated to have 6,000 cubic miles of rock salt (Heinrich 1976). Formerly

over 100 brine evaporation plants, where saline ground water was evaporated to obtain

salt, existed in Michigan, but only a dozen are still in operation today, the largest
occurring in Midland, Michigan. In addition, Michigan has one underground salt mine in

Wayne County, Michigan (Heinrich 1976).

Besides table salt, salt is used for chemical manufacturing, meat packing, deicing
streets, in water softeners, animal feed (Dorr and Eschman 1988) and to improve the soil
for agriculture (Winchell 1860). In addition to salt, brine waters that contain other trace
minerals are evaporated to harvest some of the less abundant chemicals such as bromine,
calcium chloride, iodine, magnesium compounds and potash (Dorr and Eschman 1988).
History: Throughout history, salt has played a role in establishing cities, causing wars,
preserving food, and was surrounded by religion and myths. Salt was believed to
empower fertility and protection. Salt packets were carried by brides and groom in
Europe to prevent impotence. Babies were rubbed with salt for protection (Kurlansky
2002).

Ancient Egyptians were the first to preserve food with salt by 2000 BC, and salt
was the major way of preserving food until the 18005 when canning using heat was
developed followed by the development of quick freezing in the 1900s The ancient
Chinese were reported to have the first salt works. The Roman Empire built most of their
cities near salt works, and one of the first Roman road was built to transport salt. The
Romans are the source of some common English words, such as salary, which originated
from Roman soldiers sometimes being paid in salt. Also, Romans would put salt on their
greens giving rise to the term “salad" (Kurlansky 2002).

In the Middle Ages, salt was used to preserve food, cure leather, clean chimneys,

solder pipes, glaze pottery and as medicine. Trade of salt was a major industry, and salt

taxes in France played a major role in the French Revolution that overthrew Louis XVI
and his wife Marie Antoinette (Kurlansky 2002). In more recent times, salt was an
extremely precious commodity, especially in poorer areas like the interior of Afiica
where salt was a luxury of the rich and at times could only be obtained fiom sources 90
miles away (Winchell 1860). In India, Ghandi lead a march to the sea at Dandi to
harvest salt as part of a rebellion against British salt laws (Kurlansky 2002).

In the Americas, most Native American cultures had a salt god among their
deities. Cortez with his Spanish army took over the salt works of the Aztec Empire to
take over power. The first patent issued in America was made in the early colony of
Jamestown for a special process to make salt (Kurlansky 2002).

In Michigan, Native Americans used salt seeps before white men came (Cook
1914). Soon after white men settled, attempts were made to manufacture salt on the Salt
River and Macomb County and at Saline in Washtenaw County (Cook 1914). In the
1835 convention to form a state constitution, the development of the Michigan salt
industry was begun (Cook 1914). When Michigan became a state in 1836, it was given
the power to reserve 72 sections as state salt lands (Cook 1914). In the following year,
Douglas Houghton was assigned as the first state geologist, and the major part of his first
report discussed the salt springs found in the state (Houghton 183 8). Houghton reported
five areas of salt springs in Michigan, and, soon after, the state attempted to develop salt
works. However, the state salt works were a failure, and the state salt lands were sold.
The first private salt well was established in 1840 in Grand Rapids, but no others were

attempted until 20 years later (Cook 1914). The salt industry in Michigan peaked in

1905, with the state producing the most and best quality salt in the United States (Cook
1914).

Unlike the brine salts manufactured today, sodium chloride was the main product.
In the early days of the salt industry, the other constituents such as bromine, calcium
chloride, magnesium chloride, etc, were waste product called bittern and usually thrown
away (Winchell 1860). Later, bromine and calcium chloride were also manufactured
fi'om the bittern (Cook 1914). Salt was so valuable that some early manufacturers before
1860 would use 220 or more gallons of water to produce one bushel of salt, meaning the
brine was about 2.9% salt (Winchell 1860). Later, manufacturers had wells that produced
brine with 17% to 25% salt, which only required 33 to 22 gallons of water, respectively
to produce one bushel of salt (Cook 1914, calculations from Winchell 1860).
Environment: Natural saline aquatic areas occur in oceans, coastal wetlands, inland
lakes and wetlands in arid regions, and saline wetlands in some temperate regions
(W aisel 1972), however, many of these areas are being degraded or destroyed by humans
(Ungar 1991, Hinrichsen 1998). Worldwide, coastal saline wetlands may have already
been reduced by 50%. In the United States, 50% of coastal wetlands were lost between
1970 and 1990 (Hirichsen 1998). Inland wetlands of all types have not fared much
better, many of them being destroyed for agriculture and development (Mitsch and
Gosselink 2000). In temperate regions, rare saline wetlands (Waisel 1972) have become
rarer and are extremely threatened globally (MNFI).

Although many natural saline areas are being degraded, many formerly non-saline

areas are becoming impacted by salts due to agricultural irrigation in arid regions, road

salt run-off, urbanization, sewage output and waste products from chemical
manufacturing (Waisel 1972, Ungar 1974).

In arid regions, salts are left in the soil after irrigation. In some locations, they
exist as natural deposits in fossil beds. Eventually, when enough salts build up, the land
can not produce crops. In the United States about 8 million acres are afl‘ected by salt
(Carter 1975). Due to the leaching of salt from soils, streams that drain irrigated fields
usually increase in salinity as they move down stream and some streams have salt
marshes adjacent to them due to the salt run—off (Carter 1975).

Salt run-off from icy roads has been studied by several authors for impacts on
various environmental aspects (Hutchinson 1970, Hughes et al. 1975, Wilcox 1986,
Demers and Sage 1989, Richburg et al. 2001, Pitelka and Kellogg 1979) and the invasion
of salt tolerant plants beyond their normal range (Rezinek 1980, Scott and Davison
1985). Sodium chloride, the main road salt used, can be especially problematic in clay
soils. Na+ ions bond with clay soils making it impermeable and reducing drainage
(Hutchinson 1970, Semoradova 1984). Also sodium salts seem to replace other soil
nutrients such as potassium, calcium, magnesium and phosphorus (Semoradova 1984).

Road salts have significantly increased the salt concentration of streams in the
Adirondack Mountains of New York that pass under or adjacent to salted highways, and
salinity levels remain high for six months after road salting ceases (Demers and Sage
1990). Thus, these streams could have permanently raised salt levels if salting continues
year after year. Also, road salts have contaminated drinking wells near roads so that they

have exceeded recommended limits for salt (Hutchinson 1970).

Deicing salt modified the plant community in a Sphagnum bog in Indiana by
allowing non-bog species to invade and reducing or destroying the salt intolerant species
(Wilcox 1986). In a calcareous fen community, species richness, evenness and plant
cover were reduced in areas of high road salt run-off (Richburg et al. 2001). In the New
England area, roadside maple trees have been killed by the salts (Hutchinson 1970), and,
in some areas, road salts have killed the vegetation resulting in soil erosion (Hughes et al.
1975)

On British roadways, coastal salt tolerant plants are usually found where the
glycophytic plants (plants that do not tolerate salt) have been damaged allowing
halophytes to invade (Scott and Davison 1985). Coastal species have also been found on
roadsides in many European countries and the United States (Scott and Davison 1985) In
Michigan, a halophyte assemblage found in a saline roadside median contained 12 non-
native species, 6 of these new to the state, and 12 salt tolerant species often found in
weedy non-saline areas (Reznicek 1980).

The effects of industry were seen in the early 19005 where brine wells were
creating a salty enough environment for several halophytic plants to occur (Brown 1917).
Brine salt spills ofien occur with oil well drilling (Baveye et al. 1985). Industrial
processes to harvest trace minerals from brines and remediation of underground brine
storage wells, such as at the Dow plant in Midland, Michigan have produced ponds

containing highly saline water with low biotic diversity.

firm of the Study

The main question addressed in my study was an assessment of how salt affects
wetland communities. This assessment includes wetland communities in both a natural
salt wetland and a created salt pond in Michigan.

Natural saline wetlands are extremely rare in Michigan as well as globally
(MNFI). I surveyed the plant community in relation to water chemistry characteristics of
one of the few remaining natural salt seep wetlands in the state of Michigan (Chapter 2).

Secondly, I surveyed the biota and water chemistry of a created salt pond
(Chapter 3). At the Dow Chemical Company in Midland, MI, spent brine resulting from
chemical processes had been released over several decades into a created storage pond
complex. This brine pond complex consisted of four interconnected ponds with three of
them being chemically distinct; salinity was lowest in the north-south (N-S) pond,
intermediate in the east-west (E-W) pond, and highest in the hydrologically
interconnected main and outlet ponds. These differences in salinity have resulted in
unique plant and animal communities living in each section of the pond complex. This
pond provided a unique gradient of increasing salinity, which allowed me to compare
effects of increasing salinity on the biota.

Thirdly, to increase the biotic diversity of the created salt pond, I studied survival
and growth (Chapter 4) of four species of salt tolerant plants transplanted to the brine
pond in Midland. Since this transplanting experiment occurred late in the growing
season, three of these four species were transplanted to a freshwater storm water retention
pond on the campus of Michigan State University to detemrine if plants transplanted so

late in the season would survive and grow. Since one species, Phragmites australis, is

extremely invasive (Hammer 1992) and already occurred on site around the edge of the

Dow pond in Midland, it was not transplanted to the storm water retention pond.

Works Cited

Baveye, P., J. J. Hassett, T. D. Hinesly, R. L. Jones. 1985. Some effect on soils and plants
and reclamation of salt affected lands, a literature review. Dow Chemical Report.

Brown, F. B. H. 1917. Flora of a Wayne County Salt Marsh. Michigan Academy of
Sciences Report. 19: 219.

Carter, D. L. 1975. Problems of salinity in Agriculture. In Plants in Saline Environments.
Ed. A. Poljakoff-Mayber and J. Gale. Springer-Verlag, New York. pp. 25-3 8.

Catling, P. M. and S. M. McKay. 1981. A review of the occurrence of halophytes in the
eastern Great Lakes Region. Michigan Botanist 20: 167-179.

Chapman, K. A., V. L. Dunevitz, and H. T. Kuhn. 1985. Vegetation and chemical
analysis of a salt marsh in Clinton County, Michigan. Michigan Botanist 24: 135-
144.

Chapman, V. J. 19743. Salt Marshes and Salt Deserts of the World. 2"d edition. Verlag
Von J. Cramer, Germany.

Cook, W. C. 1914. The brine and salt deposits of Michigan. Mich. Geol. and Biol.
Survey Pub] 15, Geo. Series 12. 188 pp.

Demers, CL. and R. W. Sage, Jr. 1990. Effects of road deicing salt on chloride levels in
four Adirondack streams. Water, Air and Soil Pollution. 49: 369-373.

Dorr, Jr., J. A. and D. F. Eschman. 1970. Geology of Michigan. University of Michigan
Press: Ann Arbor.

Hammer, D. A. 1992. Creating Freshwater Wetlands. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton.

Heinrich, E. W. 1976. The Mineralogy of Michigan. Speaker-Hines and Thomas, Inc.:
Lansing.

Hinrichsen, D. 1998. Coastal Waters of the World: Trends, Threats and Strategies. Islan
Press, Washington, DC.

Houghton, D. 1838. Report of the state geologist. House documents 24: 96-148 in G. N.

Fuller, Geological Reports of Douglass Houghton. Michigan Historical Society,
Lansing. 1928.

Hughes, T. D. J. D. Butler, and G. D. Sanks. 1975. Salt tolerance and suitability of
various grasses for saline roadsides. J. Environ. Qual. 4(1): 65-68.

Hutchinson, F. E. 1970. Environmental pollution from highway deicing compounds. J.
Soil Water Conserv. 25: 144-146.

Kurlansky, M. 2002. Salt, a World History. Walker and Company, New York.

MacGregor, G. A. and H. E. de Wardener. 1998. Salt, Diet and Health. Cambridge
University Press, United Kingdom.

Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI). Michigan State University Extension.
http://web4. msue, msu.edux’mnfu'homefcfm.

Mitsch, W. J. and J. G. Gosselink. 2000. Wetlands. 3rd ed. John Wiley and Sons, New
York.

Pitelka, L. F. and D. L. Kellogg. 1979. Salt tolerance in Roadside populations of two
herbaceous perennials. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club. 106(2): 131-134.

Reznicek, A. A. 1980. Halophytes along a Michigan roadside with comments on the
occurrence of halophytes in Michigan.

Richburg, J. A., W. A. Patterson III, and F. Lowenstein. 2001. Effects of road salt and
Phragmites australis invasion on the vegetation of a western Massachusetts
calcareous lake-basin fen. Wetlands. 21(2): 247-255.

Scott N. E. and A. W. Davison. 1985. The distribution and ecology of coastal species on
roadsides. Vegetatio. 62: 433-440.

Semoradova, E. 1984. The effect c f the doses and kinds of road salts on the soil. Scientia
Agriculturae Bohemoslovaca. 16(2): 89-106.

Ungar, 1. W. 1974. Inland halophytes of the United States. In Ecology of Halophytes. Ed
R. J. Reimbold and W. H. Queen. Academic Press, New York.

Ungar, I. W. 1991. Ecophysiology of Vascular Halophytes. CRC Press, Boca Raton.

Vander, A., J. Sherman and D. Luciano. 1998. Human Physiology. 7'h ed. McGraw-Hill,
Boston.

Waisel, Y. 1972. Biology of Halophytes. Academic Press, New York.

Wilcox, D. A 1986. The effects of deicing salts on vegetation in Pinhook Bog, Indiana.
Can. J. Bot. 64: 865-874.

Winchell, A., 1861. First Biennial Report of the Progress of the Geological Survey of

Michigan, Embracing Observations on the Geology, Zoology, and Botany of the
Lower Peninsula. Hosmer and Kerr, Lansing.

10

L ver2‘ urv "m,1'__t_ - 'W‘L-"III'— ... oWater umt‘
mm

In the United States, saline aquatic habitats are common along ocean shores and
inlets and in wetlands in arid regions of the western United States. In the more humid,
inland areas of the Midwestern United States, saline aquatic habitats are rare and usually
only occur over fossil salt beds or by salt springs (W aisel 1972). According to the
Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI), inland salt seeps are extremely threatened
habitats on a global basis.

Saline seeps and wetlands in the Midwest are a result of prehistoric seas that once
covered the area Seas during the Paleozoic era formed in the Michigan Basin, which
was a large depressional area covering most of the current state of Michigan (Dorr and
Eschman 1970). These seas were relatively isolated and became highly saturated with
salts that precipitated to the sea floor. During the Pleistocene Ice Age, a thick layer of
glacial sediments covered and isolated the salty sea sediments. Salt seeps form when
these glacial sediments are eroded away so that ground water seeping up to the surface
passes the saline sediments and carries some of the dissolved ions to the land surface
(Dorr and Eschman 1970).

In 1838, Douglas Hougthton, Michigan’s first state geologist reported over 20
natural salt seeps or springs in nine counties in the central lower peninsula of Michigan
(Houghton 1838). However, most of these natural seeps have been destroyed due to
human interference, and natural saline marshes are now critically imperiled with fewer

than 5 inland seeps left in the state of Michigan (MNFI).

11

Plants that can live some part of their life cycle in 0.5 ppt salinity are considered
halophytes (Chapman 1974). Based on early records of plants and natural saline areas,
only three halophytic plants appear to be native to Michigan, Schoenoplectus americwrus
(formerly Scirpus olneyr'), Eleoclxm‘sparvula, and Chara spp. (Catling and McKay
1981). S. americams (Olney's three-square bulrush) is an emergent species of bulrush
that is considered threatened in the state of Michigan (MNFI). It is reportedly found in
four Michigan counties (Voss 1972), and can tolerate salinity up to 20 ppt (Broome et al.
1995). This species is ideal for revegetating salt impacted wetland areas because it is a
tall native halophyte that is used for food and habitat by birds and mammals (Weller
1994). E parvula, known as dwarf spike rush, is a short emergent and extremely rare
halophyte found in only two saline wetlands in Michigan (V oss 1973). The third
halophytic species, Chara spp. (musk grass), is actually an unidentified species of
macroalgae.

Although only three halophytes are native to Michigan, several non-native
halophytes from the East and West Coasts and Europe have been identified along a
roadside median in Michigan (Reznicek 1980, see Appendix A). In addition, several
species native to Michigan appear to tolerate elevated saline levels in other populations
and areas of their range (see App. A).

The Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) surveyed the wetlands in
Michigan and found nearly 40 saline wetlands, but only two were good quality (Chapman
et al. 1985). Chapman et al. (1985) described the plant community of one of these salt

marshes along the Maple River in Clinton County. The other good quality saline seep is

12

located on the south side of the Maple River, also in Clinton County, and was the focus
of this study (Figure 1).
Hypotheses

I addressed the following questions for the Maple River salt seep: 1) What
environmental factors influence the distribution and abundance of plant species at the
Maple River salt seep?; 2) Did detectable differences occur in plant community
composition between 2001 and 2002; and 3) had the plant community changed since its
composition was documented by Shaddellee (1983)?

In the central areas of the seep, S. americanus is dominant, but the edges, which
are affected by fluctuating water levels, are dominated by T min mgrastifolia and 71
Iatrfolia (narrow and broad leafed cattails) and more diverse forested areas. The edge
areas receive run-off fiom an upland forest on the south end, and overflowing river water
on the north, east, and west edges. Therefore, I hypothesized that high halophyte
abundance would correlate with high salt concentration and stable water levels and that S
amerr'canus abundance would decrease due to less saline conditions as distance increased
from the seepage area. Second, I hypothesized that there would be no detectable
differences in plant community composition between 2000 and 2001. Third, I
hypothesized that the composition of the plant community in 2000 and 2001 would be
similar to the community composition described in 1983 by Shaddellee (1983).

The Maple River natural salt seep is located in the flood zone on the south side of
the Maple River in northwest Clinton County, Michigan (T8N, R4W, sec. 15)(Figure 1a

and 1b). The wetland around the seep has a very distinctive plant assemblage dominated

13

by S. americamrs, Aster Imrceolatus, and TI argustr’folia (App. B). The S. americanus
patch stretches for approximately 90 m in a northeast direction and is approximately 40 m
wide (Figure 1b). At the southwest end of the S. americanus patch, there is an open
muddy area, believed to be the main seepage area for the saline water, approximately 10
m2 in size. On the east and west edges of the patch, forested wetland replaces S.
americmms, and a steep sloping hill with upland vegetation replaces S. mnericwms on the
southern edge of the patch. At the northern edges of the patch, S. americanus is replaced
by nearly monodominant stands of II angustrfolia (Figure 1b). TWO other patches of
Typha (a mixture of TI angustifolia and 71 Iatrfolia) occur on the south west corner just
past the open muddy area, and near the middle of the S. mnericamrs at the base of the
upland hill (Figure 1b).
Methods

Adjacent circular plots with a 10 m radius (315 m2) for transect A and a 5 m
radius (79 m2) for transect B were established along two perpendicular transects (A and
B) that crossed at the center of the saline water seepage area. Transect A was longer than
transect B since the S. mnerr’cmms dominated area was not as wide as it was long (Figure
1b). Thus, a smaller plot size was used along transect B. This design resulted in 8-11
individual plots per transect (n=10 for 2000, 11 for 2001 for transect A; n=8 in both years
for transect B). A smaller plot size was used for transect B to more precisely document
the change in plant communities expected along this axis based on the shape of the S.
wnen'canus dominated patch (Figure 1b). Plant stems were counted and identified within
0.25 m2 quadrats at three random locations within each plot. All stems were counted at

the base of the plant. The plant community was sampled in early August 2000 and late

14

July of 2001 to determine changes from year to year. In addition, field notes from 1983
(Shaddalee 1983) from the Michigan Natural Features Inventory were used for
comparison to the current plant assemblage.

Water samples were collected on May 24, 2001 from the center of every plot.
Conductivity, temperature, and water depth were recorded on site, and water samples
were taken to the laboratory to test for pH and alkalinity. Samples were analyzed by the
Michigan State University Soil Testing Laboratory for N03-N, NIL-N, K, Ca, ortho-P,
Mn, Na, and Cl concentrations. Nos-N was analyzed using a colorimetric method on a
Lachat (Balson 1988). NIL-N was determined using the salicylate colorimetric method
(Nelson 1983). K, Ca, Mn, and Na were analyzed using flame emissions (Warncke and
Brown 1998). C1 was determined by the chloride electrode method (Gelderrnan 1998).
Finally, ortho-P was analyzed using the ascorbic acid method (Frank et al 1998).

Water depth and/or depth to the water table was measured in the fall of 2001.
Where there was no standing water, a pit up to 76 cm deep was dug every 10 m along
transect A and every 5 m along transect B. Water was allowed to fill the pit, and the
distance of the water surface to the soil surface was used as depth to water table.
Conductivity and water temperature were also taken at this time and compared to results
of the spring samples.

Statistical analyses - The stem counts were averaged for the three 0.25m2 quadrats per
plot and multiplied by four to obtain stem counts/m2 per plot. Relative abundances were
detemrined by dividing the number of stems for each species within a plot by the total
number of stems in that plot. The dominant and common plant species (dominant

meaning those plants with >50°/o frequency of occurrence and relative abundance and

15

common plants meaning those with >50% frequency of occurrence but <50% relative
abundance) were analyzed individually, and all other plants were grouped into an “other
species” category. Averages and standard deviations for environmental variables were
determined and differences in these variables based on the presence or absence of S.
americanus were determined using a t-test in Systat 8.0. Abundances of each plant
species were correlated to the environmental variables and to abundances for each year
using a Spearman’s rank correlation in Systat 8.0, since the data were not normally
distributed (Wheater and Cook 2000). To determine environmental variables that could
be used in a regression analysis, a principal components factor analysis was run using
Systat 8.0 to remove the collinear data in the set of environmental variables (Kachigan
1986). Environmental factors that were chosen based on factor analysis were
standardized and used in forward stepwise multiple regression analyses for dominant,
common and other plant species for each year using Systat 8.0, although the
environmental factors were only recorded in 2001. To determine changes in plant
community over time, a Wilcoxon signed rank test of the differences between years was
used to compare the stem counts/m2 and relative abundances of species per plot for 2000
and 2001. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used because of expected non-normal
distribution of the data (Schabenberger 1999). Significant differences were determined at
p<0.05.
Btu!!!

The species found at the Maple River salt seep are listed in Appendix B. The
dominant species were Schoemplectus americanus and Aster Ianceolatus in the saline

area and T ypha spp. around the edges and to the north of the saline area (Figure 1a).

16

Mentha arvensis was also considered common; however, its relative abundance was low
(Figures 2 and 3, Table 1) in most plots. Two species of endangered, native Michigan
halophytes were found at this seep (MNFI, Catling and McCay 1981): S. americanus was
abundant both in 2000 and 2001, while Eleocharisparvula was found only around the
seep area in 2001. In 2000, a few dead Chara spp. plants, the third native Michigan
halophyte, were found at the seep area, but none were found in 2001.

A total of 41 species were found in the plant sampling. Fifteen species were
found in the S. americanus patch, but six of these species were found only on the edges
of the patch. Fifieen species were also exclusively found in the upland forest, six species
were exclusively found in the forested wetland and one species was exclusively found in
the T ypha patch (see App. B).

The means for all plots of the stem counts/m2 and relative abundances for the
dominant and common plant species were the same for all species except S. americanus
and 71 latrfolia (Table 1). Both species of T who were grouped together in 2000, but
were separated into two species in 2001. 71 angustrfolia was significantly correlated with
the grouped ijha spp. for both years since it was found more often than T. latifolia in
2001. Correlations comparing 2000 to 2001 showed positive r, meaning similar patterns
of association for all species except I Iatrfolia in 2001 to T who spp. in 2000 (Table 1).

Relative abundance per plot (Figures 2 and 3) were significantly correlated to
average stem counts per m2 for each dominant plant species within the same year (Table
2). Correlations for stem counts (Figures 4-8, Table 2) and relative abundance (Figures 2

and 3) comparing 2000 to 2001 were also significant for all the dominant species except

17

T. larifolia. The number of species per plot (Figure 9) positively correlated with stem
counts of other species (Table 2).

Conductivity data (Figure 10), chemical data for C1, Ca, and Na (Figures 11 and
12) and depth to water table measures (Figure 15) confirm that the open muddy area
assumed to be the primary salt seep (0 point in the graphs) is the source of most salinity
in this wetland, although there seems to be a secondary seepage area at a distance of
about 50-55 m fiom point 0 along transect A (Figures 11, 12 and 15). There also is a peak
in nearly all water chemistry measurements (except N03-N, Figure 13) at —40m on
transect A (Figures 11-14), however, this peak is not seen in the conductivities (Figure
10) that were performed in the field.

The peak stem counts and relative abundances for S. americanus were near the
open muddy seep area, and 60 to 80m fiom the muddy area on transect A (Figures 2-4).
These high counts of S. americanus corresponded to the peak conductivities, Cl, Ca, and
Na concentrations (Figures 10-12).

The depth of the water table, conductivity, alkalinity, Ca, Na, and C1 were
significantly higher in plots where S. americanus was present (Table 3). However,
temperature and N03 were significantly higher in plots where S. americanus was absent
(Table 3). Spring water depth, pH, N114, ortho-P, K, and Mn were similar whether S.
amerims was present or absent (Table 3).

Conductivity was measured in both spring and summer of 2001. The trends in
conductivity for spring and summer 2001 were similar for both transects (Figure 10).
Conductivities were generally lower in the spring than in the summer, perhaps due to a

higher water table and/or the influence of spring flooding. In particular, the northern

18

section of transect B was strongly influenced by the flooded Maple River in the spring,
and conductivities for this part of the transect were much lower tlnn those recorded in the
fall (Figure 10).

Environmental factors indicated strong positive correlations between Na, C1, Ca
and alkalinity (Table 4, Figure 17). Spring water depth, N03, and ortho-P (Figures 13,
14) were also positively correlated to each other, but negatively correlated to Na, Cl, Ca
and alkalinity (Table 4, Figure 17). Spring water depth was also negatively correlated to
conductivity and depth to water table, but conductivity and depth to water table were
positively correlated to each other (Table 4, Figure 17). Temperature was negatively
correlated to conductivity, and ortho-P was positively correhted to NIL. K, Mn, and pH
had no significant correlations (Table 4, Figure 17).

Table 5 shows the correlations of the plant data to the environmental data. S.
amerr'canus was positively correlated with depth to water table, conductivity and Na, but
negatively correlated with spring water depth, N03, and ortho-P in both years for stem
counts/m2 and relative abundance per plot (Table 5). M. arvensis stem counts/m2 were
positively correlated with alkalinity (Table 5). Other species were negatively correlated
with depth to water table for stem counts/m2 and for 2000 relative abundance per plot
(Table 5).

Based on the principal components factor amlysis, four environmental factors
were determined to account for the majority of variation. These factors were depth to
water table, conductivity, pH, and alkalinity. However, since I was interested in effects

of salinity, I also included C1 in the analysis. Also, nutrients are important factors in

19

plant communities, so N03 and ortho-P were also included. Thus, a total of seven
environmental factors were used in the regression analysis (Table 6).

Stem counts and relative abundance of S. americanus were positively related to
conductivity and negatively related to ortho-P for both years. S. amerr'canus was also
negatively related to Cl, N03, and alkalinity in 2000, but not 2001. In 2000, S.
americanus stem counts were negatively related to depth of the water table, but in 2001,
stem counts and relative abundance were positively correlated to depth of water table
(Table 6). M. arvensis was negatively related to alkalinity for all but 2001 relative
abundance, and positively related to C l in 2000, but not in 2001 (Table 6). A.
Ianceolatus relative abundance was positively correlated to ortho-P for both years (Table
6). In 2001, T. Iatifolia was positively correlated to ortho-P for stem counts and relative
abundance. T. angustrfolia was negatively correlated to conductivity in 2001 (Table 6).
Other species were negatively related to alkalinity in all but relative abundance for 2000.
Other species were also negatively related to conductivity in 2000, but not 2001, and
negatively related to depth to water table in 2001, but not 2000 (Table 6).

D ion

The water levels at the muddy open area were never deeper than a few
centimeters. Even when the area was not flooded, the water table was always within a
few ems of the surface, and the soil remained saturated for the whole growing season.
Chemical and environmental data confirmed that this muddy area was the primary source
of saline water into the wetland, although a secondary seepage area appeared to be likely
about 50 to 60 m to the southeast along transect A (Figure 1b) based on chemical data

(Figmes 10-12 and 15). The wetland around the primary seep maintained a fairly stable

20

water level throughout the year ranging fiom 5 cm above to 17 cm below the soil surface.
The areas down slope to the north, east, and west, where the plant community visibly
changed fiom a S. americanus dominated community to a T wha dominated or forested
wetland community, had much greater fluctuations in water depth, ranging from nearly
one m deep in the spring to 30 cm below the soil surface in late summer. The areas down
slope of the S. americanus patch were mainly flood plain wetlands, and, not surprisingly,
water level appeared to be controlled by the flood regime of the Maple River. The seep
was more dependent on ground water, as was indicated by its more consistent water
levels. This seepage area is near the base of a steep hill or small escarpment that
separates the adjacent upland from the floodplain. The upland area south of the seep
never had water near the soil surface.

Of the 41 species found in the seep plant sampling, only 15 were found in the S.
amerr’camrs patch (App. B). Of these 15 species, 6 were at the edges of the patch and 9
were found within the patch. Nine species found were salt tolerant, and eight of the salt
tolerant species were found in the S. americanus patch (Peltandra virginica, an
introduced species in Michigan, was only found in the forested wetland, App A and B).
Two of the species found in the patch are rare and endangered native halophytes of
Michigan (S. americanus and E parvula, Catling and McKay 1981, MNFI). Atriplex
panda, an introduced, non-native salt tolerant species in Michigan (Voss 1985), was
frequently encountered within the S. americanus patch, and II mrgustrfolr’a, another
introduced halophyte (Chapman et al 2001), was abundant on the edges and formed
monodominant stands on the north end of the S. americamrs patch (App B). The four

remaining salt tolerant species (Aster lanceolatus, T. latrfolia, Mentha arvensis, and

21

Acorns calanms) are common throughout the state of Michigan (Voss 1972, 1996).
Although the remaining seven species are not identified as salt tolerant, four of these
species (Eupatorium perfoliatum, E. maculatum, Onoclea sensitiva, and Equisetum spp.)
were found in another salt seep in Michigan (Chapman et al 1985) and are often found
along roadsides (V oss 1996, Billington 1952) indicating possible salt tolerance. These
remaining seven species (Scuttelarr’a galericulata, Phalaris amndinacea and Pilea spp.
in addition to the four mentioned above) found in the S. amerr'aamrs patch (App. B) are
widespread and common throughout the state of Michigan with the exception of PiIea
spp. which is found mostly in southern Michigan.

In most cases, the plants that were found at the seep are common species found
throughout Michigan, but were found in low numbers in the seep (except for the
endangered halophyte E parvula). The four dominant and common species at the seep
were all salt tolerant, and with the exception of S. amerr‘ccnms are also very common in
the state of Michigan.

Based on my literature search, 88 native plant species in Michigan and numerous
introduced species have salt tolerant populations at some point in their habitat range
(Chapman et al 2001, Winchell 1860, Voss 1972, 1985, and 1996, Reznicek 1980, App.
A). However, only nine salt tolerant species were found at the seep, two introduced and
the other seven native Michigan species (App A and B). Furthermore, two endangered
Michigan halophytes (MNF I) were found, one of them dominating a large portion of the
seep. Wheeler (1891) reported these two species at this seep (a “deer lick” near
Hubbardston) in the late 18003. Thus, this seep appears to be a well-suited habitat for

these two rare species in Michigan.

22

Abundance of S. amerr‘canus was related to conductivity. S amerr‘ccmus is a
halophytic plant, and as expected was associated with high ion concentrations. E.
parvula, another native Michigan halophyte, was very rare and found only in the open,
non-vegetated seep area in 2001. E. parvula seedlings emerge in greater densities from
non-vegetated areas (Baldwin et al. 1996) as was supported by this study. Although this
species is capable of germinating at high salinities (up to 16 ppt in flooded conditions),
salinities of only 2 ppt can greatly reduce germination (Baldwin et al. 1996). Although
this wetland is predominately ground water fed, rain can reduce the salinity of surface
layers by 1% salinity (Chapman 1974). The annual precipitation (based on monthly
precipitation data) from Grand Rapids, MI (July 1997-current) for both years of this study
were nearly the same, but a few years before 2000, the precipitation was much lower.
Perhaps, salinity in this low precipitation period rose to levels high enough to eliminate
Epw'vulafiomthe seepagearea Ifso, it is possiblethatEparvuIa seeds may have
required an extended period of two or more years of average or higher than average
rainfall to lower salinities in the seep area to levels low enough for germination. This is a
possible explanation of why germination was only detected in 2001 and not in 2000
despite similar level of rainfall in both years. Since I did not collect chemical data in
2000, my data were not sufficient to document that salinities were indeed lower in 2001
than in 2000. Since E pcn'vula is such a rare plant in Michigan (MNFI, Voss 1972), and
the seep I studied is only one of two areas in Michigan where both threatened species (S.
mnericanus and E parvula) of native halophytes grow, firrther studies should be
conducted on its life cycle and habitat needs in order to develop a management plan to

preserve the species in Michigan.

23

S. americamrs abundance was also negatively conelated with ortho-P. This
species is a sub-climax species (Broome et al. 1995), meaning it is easily out-competed
by other species. In 2001, T latifolia abundance was correlated to ortho-P; however,
Twin spp. grouped together in 2000 and Ti mgustrfolia in 2001 did not have significant
conelations with ortho-P. Since the species of T win were not distinguished in 2000,
correlations to environmental factors may have been hindered. T win spp. (especially T.
Iatrfolia) are known to be highly competitive, and will take over areas that are enriched
with nutrients (Svengsouk and Mitsch 2001, Hutchinson 1975). T laafolia was not
found in this wetland in a 1983 survey (Shaddalee 1983), and the T win dominated stand
where this species is predominately found was also not indicated in the 1983 study
(Shaddalee 1983). T latrfolia is a very competitive species that often displaces T.
wtgus'tifoha to less desirable deep water (Grace and Wetzel 1981) and high salinity
habitats (McMillan 1959). Maintaining this S. americanus population may depend on
maintaining low P levels in and down slope of the saline water seepage area.

The composition of the plant community did not appear to change fi'om 2000 to
2001 except that E parwla was present in 2001 but not in 2000. In comparing field
notes of this wetland fi'om 1983 (Shaddellee 1983) with my study, the plant community
structure appears to be similar, especially in terms of the distribution of the dominant
species present. S mnericanus was the dominant plant in 1983, with 71 mtgusafolia
being locally dominant on the north, east and the eastern portion of the south edges.
However, I found a mixed patch of both T. angustrfolia and T. Ianfolia on the south west
edge of the S. americcmus dominated patch that was not indicated in Shaddellee’s notes

(1983). In both studies, Aster lanceolams (called A. simplex, see Voss 1996) was

24

abundant to the point of being considered co-dominant. In both surveys Eupatorium
macularum, E. perfoliatum, M. m'vensis, Onoclea sensibilis, Atriplex hastata, Tirebpteris
palusmls and Pilea spp. were present in lower abundances. A few of the rarer species in
both surveys did not correspond (Shaddellee 1983). However, being rare, those species
could have escaped notice or recently immigrated into or emigrated out of the wetland.
Also, rare species are likely to differ between any two studies of the same area when
random quadrat placement within plots is part of the experimental design especially when
limited numbers of quadrats are sampled per plot (e. g. 3 in this study).

The greatest difference between the two surveys was that Shaddellee (1983)
found Eleocinris rostellata to be co-dorninant with S. americamrs in this wetland, and
that species was not found in my study 17 years later. Wheeler (1891) also found this
species at the seep over 100 years ago. E rostellata is an early colonizer of marl beds
and seems to grow best on marl soil that receives runoff fiom glacial till (Seischab et al.
1985). Since this wetland is groundwater fed, E rosrellata may have been less hearty and
unable to compete with the abundant and dense population of S. americanus. However,
since E. rostellata was likely present in this seep from Wheeler’s (189]) observations to
Shaddellee (1983) study, its absence would indicate a recent disappearance. Since
Shaddellee (1983) reported E rostellata as a codominant species with S. americwrus it is
unlikely that my survey would have missed this species even though I did not sample the
entire wetland. This species absence may be an early indicator of a changing
environment at the seep, and the seep should be continually monitored for changes in the

plant assemblage.

25

Cl, Ca, Na, and K were the four highest concentrated ions, respectively, at this
seep. Cl, Na, and K ion concentrations were similar to those found in seawater
(Fortescue 1980). Unfortunately, Mg another common salt of seawater was not tested in
this study. Based on the geology of Michigan, this wetland is very likely obtaining water
fi'om the saline aquifers that are remnants of the Paleozoic seas that covered Michigan
(Don and Eschman 1970). Ca, which tends to be in low concentrations in sea water
(F ortescue 1980) and in the brine waters of Michigan (Cook 1914, Dorr and Eschman
1970, Winchell 1860), likely derives from the glacial till deposits in the lower peninsula
which tend to have high concentrations of calcium carbonates (Chapman et al. 1985).

Compared to the water chemistry of bogs, swamps and fens in Northern Michigan
studied by Schwintzer and Tomberlin (1982), C1, Ca, Na, K, conductivity, and pH were
all higher at the Maple River salt seep. The alkalinity and ortho-P (reactive-P) at the
Maple River salt seep wetland were comparable to those found by Schwintzer and
Tomberlin (1982) for northern Michigan wetlands. However, the N03 and NH4
concentrations at the salt seep were more similar to river water (Allen 1995) than to
Northern Michigan wetlands (Schwintzer and Tomberlin 1982), since the N03
concentration were much higher than the NH4 concentrations at the Maple River salt
seep.

The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ 2003) studied the
river water of the Maple River watershed. They found that the river water had ammonia
values ranging fi'om 0.012 to 9.71 mgN/L and N03 levels ranged fiom 0.09 to 14.1
mgN/L (MDEQ 2003). The NH4 and N03 concentrations at the salt seep were within

the range of concentrations found in the river water. Since three edges of the salt seep

26

were flooded by river water, the river water likely contributes its nutrient concentrations
to the salt seep wetland.

Compared to the salt marsh studied by Chapman et al., (1985), my seep had
weaker brine, however, I determined ion concentrations fi'om the water, whereas
Chapman et al. (1985) used dry soil samples. Calcium, magnesium and chloride were the
most abundant ions, respectively, at the Clmpman et al. (1985) marsh, where as chloride,
calcium, and sodium had the highest concentrations, respectively, at my seep. Also pH
had a greater range in their study (Chapman et al. 1985), than in my salt seep.

This unique and rare salt seep wetland appears to support a healthy population of
rare and endangered halophytes in Michigan (MNFI). However, compared to a survey
from 17 years ago (Shaddellee 1983), some changes in plant assemblages have occurred.
This seep should continue to be monitored and protected to maintain its integrity and to

preserve the diversity of the unique plants it contains.

27

Works Cited
Allen, J. D. 1995. Stream Ecology. Chapman and Hall, London.

Baldwin, A. H., K. L. McKee, and 1. A. Mendelssohn. 1996. The influence of vegetation,
salinity, and inundation on seed banks of oligohaline coastal marshes. Am. J. Bot.
83(4): 470—479.

Balson, J. 1988. QuickChem Method No. 10-107-04-1-A. Lachat Instruments.

Billington, C. 1952. Ferns of Michigan. Cranbrook Institute of Science. Bloomfield Hills,
Michigan.

Broome, S. W., I. A. Mendelssohn and K. L. McKee. 1995. Relative grth of Spartr'na
patens (Ait.) Muhl. and Sa'rpus olneyi gray occurring in a mixed stand as affected
by salinity and flooding depth. Wetlands 15: 20-30.

Catling, P. M. and S. M. McKay. 1981. A review of the occurrence of halophytes in the
eastern Great Lakes Region. Michigan Botanist 20: 167-179.

Chapman, K. A., V. L. Dunevitz, and H. T. Kuhn. 1985. Vegetation and chemical
analysis of a salt marsh in Clinton County, Michigan. Michigan Botanist 24: 135-
144.

Chapman, K. D., L. A. Masters, M. R Penskar, A. A. Reznicek, G. S. Wilhelm, W. W.
Brodovich, K. P. Gardiner. 2001. Floristic quality assessment with wetland
categories and examples of computer applications for the state of Michigan. 2'“l
ed. Michigan Department of Natural Resources. “Wildlife Division. Natural
Heritage Program.

Chapman, V. J. 1974. Salt Marshes and Salt Deserts of the World. 2”“ edition. Verlag
Von J. Cramer, Germany-

Cook, W. C. 1914. The brine and salt deposits of Michigan. Mich. Geol. and Biol.
Survey Publ 15, Geo. Series 12. 188 pp.

Dorr, Jr., J. A. and D. F. Eschman. 1970. Geology of Michigan. University of Michigan
Press: Ann Arbor.

Fortescue, J. A. C. 1980. Environmental Geochemistry. Srpinger-Verlag, New York.
Frank, K., D. Beegle and J. Denning. 1998. Phosphorus. in Recommended Chemical Soil

Test Procedures for the North Central Region. North Central Research Publication
No. 221.

28

Gelderman, R. H., J. L. Denning and R. J. Goos. 1998. Chlorides. in Recommended
Chemical Soil Test Procedures for the North Central Region. North Central
Research Publication No. 221 .

Grace, J. B. and R G. Wetzel. 1981. Habitat partitioning and competitive displacement in
cattails (Twha): experimental field studies. Am Nat. 118: 463-474.

Houghton, D. 1838. Report of the state geologist. House documents 24: 96-148 in G. N.
Fuller, Geological Reports of Douglass Houghton. Michigan Historical Society,
Lansing. 1928.

Hutchinson, G. E. 1975. A Treatise on limnology, Vol. 3. Lirnnological botany. Wiley,
New York.

Kachigan, S. K. 1986. Statistical Analysis. Radius Press, New York.
McMillan, C. 1959. Salt tolerance within a T wha population. Am. J. Bot. 46: 521-526.

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), Water Division. 2003. A
biological survey of the Maple River watershed and selected tributaries
Shiawassee, Clinton, Montcalm, Gratiot, and Ionia Counties, Michigan August
2002. MI/DEQ/WD-03/017.

' Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI). Michigan State University Extension.
http://web4. m sue. msu . edu/mnfi/home/cfm.

Monthly Precipitation Data Grand Rapids, Michigan (July 1997 through current).
http://www.x98ruhg.net/gttp97.html.

Nelson, D. W. 1983. Determination of Ammonium in KC] extracts of soils by the
salicylate method. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis. 14(11):
105 1-1062.

Reznicek, A. A. 1980. Halophytes along a Michigan roadside with comments on the
occurrence of halophytes in Michigan.

Schabenberger, O. 1999. Statistical Methods for Biologists 1, Course Pack. MSU Printing
Services, East Lansing.

Schwintzer, C. R. and T. J. Tomberlin. 1982. Chemical and physical characteristics of
shallow ground waters in northern Michigan bogs, swamps and fens. Am. J. Bot.
69(8): 1231-1239.

Seischab, F. K., J. M. Bernard, K. F iala. 1985. Above and Belowground standing crop

partitioning of biomass by Eleocharis rostellata Torr. In the Byron-Bergen Swam,
Genessee County, New York. Am. Midland Naturalist. 114(1): 70-76.

29

Shaddellee. August 2, 1983. Field notes, N of the Island, Michigan Natural Features
Inventory.

Svengsouk, L. J. and W. J. Mitsch. 2001. Dynamics of mixtures of Twin laafoia and
Scheonoplectus tabemaemontani in nutrient-enrichment wetland experiments.
Am. Midl. Nat. 145: 309-324.

Voss, E. G. 1972. Michigan Flora, Part I, Gyrnnosperms and Monocots. Cranbrook
Institute of Science, Bloomfield Hills.

Voss, E. G. 1985. Michigan Flora, Part II, Dicots (Saurm'aceae-Cornaceae). Cranbrook
Institute of Science, Bloomfield Hills.

Voss, E. G. 1996. Michigan Flora, Part III, Dicots (Pyrolaceae-Compositae). Cranbrook
Institute of Science, Bloomfield Hills.

Waisel, Y. 1972. Biology of Halophytes. Academic Press, New York.

Warncke, D. and J. R. Brown. 1998. Potassium and other basic cations. in Recommended
Chemical Soil Test Procedures for the North Central Region. North Central
Research Publication No. 221.

Weller, M. W. 1994. Bird-habitat relationships in a Texas estuarine marsh during
summer. Wetlands 14: 293-300.

Wheater, C. P. and P. A. Cook. 2000. Using Statistics to Understand the Environment.
Routledge, London.

Winchell, A.,l861. First Biennial Report of the Progress of the Geological Survey of

Michigan, Embracing Observations on the Geology, Zoology, and Botany of the
Lower Peninsula. Hosmer and Kerr, Lansing.

30

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

05.58% 8 3.8 ewe. 05 no.“ nos—arm 05 8a 58% 8?. .83 be 3.325% gun—8 use

:23 83 - No 3 - no No dam sec
:83 83 - S 8.0 - no No awaken
:83 53 - 8 So - - - s§§e§H
”3o :83 - 8.0 33 - - - goes H
time 88 - S No - no No message .V ea c8
.83 $8 - 3.0 So - 8.0 8.0 Esta .2 088:3“
toad .080 - to to - to no assessed. season
:23 was - on we - n... no a a
$38 as o ammo on. 3m $3 in SN .mmm ago
:38 «8 o $0.0 n: n: 83 2: E as Emma
:33 an o $3 a: 0.2 - - - sigmaeu
89o :80 o a: .0 on 2 - - - seats a
tend 80 o 83 SS 98 48¢ 36 33 3388s .w «E .8
taste a: o $0.0 w: 3 £3 3 2. Essa 3.258 use
:23 38.0 a; 3mm 38 $3 3.2 $2 assesses.” 88%....
0:13AM e05 EM Gm :82 gm em Ow =82 newcomw
830:8 588% as $5 88 88
885980 30% 30>

 

 

35:33 35 com BESS
Ho: 8% manomvfi .. J. 2F ._o>o_ 8.0 05 3 Reggae 28:2: .1. new _o>o_ mod 05 3 cognac»:
a 88%5 .. 2F .mcousohoo x5e 58.3mm 2: 88m x 2: 23 33» 52.33 888 E SoeobhE

a

83:38 83»

”mate: 5 are 88 an Eng 88 58 é 92m .96 sesaeu 332 use .89 “zones“. 32%
.388 0188 05 9:323 38 “an 83% 2an 2: a 958 860% .8888 93 23588 2:. ._ 03$.

31

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

{Fond mvro- 50—150- mmnd- .0mmo- hovo — .momo :No- c.o\-\-.o;ovv.o- cNom.o- dam 550
.Fowd- 190.0 00.20- mofo- no.0- room-vo- omd- 1.30 o mix-mo- _oo_..o- meno- dam Bank-N
moro- cum—0.0 QNNo- noto- mono- .momd- mono- ..Nrm o movo- mvNO- vmvo- 6&6 .5- 5» K
mood- ooNo mNmo cnmlmo 0000- No.0 rhoo- mllomo rmro Wormo N000- 338:3 H
rmro- mo...o {ovno ovo omoo oNoo- #000. word ioroo tho omwo $230823 .V
rhNo- wood- Foo .Nooo mnvo horo rmro- whoo mono Immuloo NNvo karmic .3
.wrmo- owmd- mono ovo 1260 9‘00. VVNo- VNo- .momo .ommo :wooo matcotufie M.
“03 Ba cacao—San 033—0.— _00N
:mmn oEmmod- 9.0 _mo.o- :Na tmumd med- v9.0- mid «who- .mmm a
iovfi o meo- .mmmd- Nmn.o- Bio- .mrmo r-rmoo ovn.o- :vvod- b-vmd- 5320- .nEm .590
ano- ivmwo ov70- 0:.o- 3.0.0- 1va0- whvo- ioooo ono- AFNO- homo- . met K
hNo- :mwhog—ho- 0070- wood. :vmo.o- owvo- {Now 0 Imp”? mmN.o- v.0- .e.:o\.:.§m.=u K
32. o- NoNo No.0 .mvmo hroo 000.0 nofo- mmNo omvo vvmo 000.0- czcmtfi K
mmmo- Nrro .rvox-o_®wm.o owo moro- nowd- vlnro :vono Nnmo woNo $338623 .V
R70- wood mwro .Nwmo .tho homo mmoo word wNo flowed omvo flutes-E .V<
.ommo- vmmo- mhvo NNvo imowo wmwo- NmNd- mloNo- 5:50 .vwm.o_ ivooo natcutuEu .m.
NE com 2.500 58m 0 «Loan _00N
_ :md- vwlN0- N0_.0- Geno- ..iwond singing vad- 9 _.0- _ «£90- 0% .550
_ 59.0. C- _ .0- mmmd- ..:..on.0- ...0_m.0- 3.3-0 0 0000- MNNd- _0m.0- Q3. SEAN
0 {Nemd 2.0 :00 fink-0.0- m: 0- 35—00 *NOm.0_mVN.0 3263823 .v.
_ :00 meo _N_.o v2 0- soomd rimmed m0 niacin V<
_ 30.0- nde- 0N0- N30 3.0 l— ...0000 “inanimate .m
003 .50 cacao—Boa DEE—om 000N
z 3536 .290- owed Rue Rod- dawn
_ $320. 2.0- 31.0 meme- dam .oEO
_ 3&6- of .0. Rd- i3 mike
_ .3090 .L-Nwd . . .v.
_ _Nv.0 minute V<
— ”HSUUm-susc .W
E NE 50 E300 m omauo>u 000N
dam dam 2233652. Monastic Goa-SEQ dam dam nausea-6:5 26.6.2ch
.550 BfiQAN .V V< .m- dmm u .550 U-‘QAN .V hay-taxi: $< M.
“03 com 1 03 23% NE hum E300 Eoum ownuozw ooom

 

 

 

.80 v a 8:865 I. 98 mod v a 3329: * .Som new ooom .6.“ 860% ESQ 550 23 20888
£8583 .8.“ 83 con 828259“ 033E 28 ”SEES 88m owfigm 50 28:29:00 315 magnum .N 033.

32

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

£3.38 23 53 8%- $8- 3;. 353.0 £3.32 33 2; 33. again

_ w; as Ed was- $2- 82. ii :mwoizd god a; $2- 233%:

_ £8 22 3o 83. ONE- 82 23 3.39.325 :2 03¢ sis:

_ was :5 :3 $5. $3 5.0 22 £8380 82 §§§§<

_ :3 a; $3. a; :2 22 02° 2.5.36 ”NEE:

_ ad. .3333- 3.0- a; :2 $3 tbadgzfissaw

8:. sq 852.3% 2628 50m

_ £828? 32. v8.0- :3. :3 58- E;

_ £3. g3- 33. 30642.? :30- €325

_ Ed 38 N2; :3 32- .QQWQEQ

_ 23 £3 2; 33- $353.5 H

_ 52 :2 22 2303 K

_ 23 83 3385 .w

_ SS 2223.:

_ 358.2223 m.

NE 3m :58 SSW omega Som
SB 5: .3: SB .3 an:
.9: x9338 33x25 $883 0?»; 8.225» .nam dam bangs SEES 389:3 03min 35:5
23 K K .0. 2 u. a: .25 33 K a. .w .3 .m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NE Sq :58 so; omega SON

 

 

 

63 5g oocmucsnm 9622 Sow

$85880 N 28¢

33

Table 3. The means (i SD) for environmental factors for all plots combined, plots
containing S. americamw and plots where S. wnericanus was absent. The t-statistics and
p-values comparing plots with and without S. mnericams. Number of samples (n) in
parenthesis. A * indicates significance below .05 and ” indicates significance at or

 

 

below .001.
Environmental Means for all S mnericanus S mnericanus T, p values
factors plots (n=18) absent (n=5) present (n=13)
Depth to water table -11 i 8 -29 i 1 -8 i 3 -l4.47.
(cm) >0.001**
Spring water depth 24 i 37 64 i 52 9 i 9 2.35,
(cm) 0.077
Conductivity (uS) 1560 :1: 1060 534 i 3 1790 i: 1040 -4.35.
0.001”
pH 7.45 i 0.22 7.39 i 0.04 7.47 i 0.24 4.19,
0.253
Alkalinity (mg 248 :l: 82 160 i 1 268 :t 77 -5.00.
CaC03/L) >0.001**
Temperature (°C) 14.1 i 0.9 14.9 i 0.3 13.9 i 1.0 2.91.
0014"
N03 (mg NIL) 3.0i3.6 7.51 i018 1.96ir3.13 6.35,
>0.001**
NH4 (mg N/L) 0.10 :t 0.07 0.13 :1: 0.02 0.09 i 0.07 1.73,
0.105
Ortho-P (mg/L) 0.04 i 0.05 0.06 :1: 0.01 0.04 i 0.06 1.28.
0.221
K (mg/L) 5.4 :t 5.1 3.3 i 4.5 5.8 i 5.3 -0.85,
0.453
Ca (mg/L) 391 i 298 102 i 2.9 458 i 292 -4.39,
0.001 "
Mn (mg/L) 0.18 i 0.29 0.05 i 0.04 0.21 :t 0.31 -1.74,
0.104
Na (mg/L) 203 j: 191 12 i 1 247 i 185 -4.58.
0.001"
Cl (mg/L) 661 i 580 74 i 4 797 i 561 -4.64,
0.001"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:2222 .32. .2222 22. :22- $2.22. :E222- :2 32 a
_ 22 .22. :222 :2. :22- ..§.2-E2- :2222. 22 22 .z
_ $2 22 m2 :2. s2. 22. £2. 2 :2. $2 :2 =2
_ .2222. .22 .32 .22 :2 s2. :2. :2. 22. 2.25
2 22 :2. :22. :22. 22. £2,222. 22 n2 6
_ :2- 22. :2. 2.2- 22 :2- a2 22. v.
2 22 Q2 22. 22 22 22- ;2. 2-22
_ :22 :2 :22- 22 2.2. :2- 2.82
_ :2 £22.22- :32- ::2. 2.25%
2 22- a2- .22. $2. 23235.
_ 22 22 22 22:2
_ :2- ;2 :2
_ .22 2.82:8
_ 038 523 9 595
22 as 286 22
£2 222 $22 $2 2% ea. 22 2322.2...
32.2 :2 25.2223 225 2.22 2.82 22 .352 2532 £32228 9&2

 

 

.56 v a 8:3me 3.. 28 mod v a 8:8me _.. .2822 3552.835 wEEmEoQ 32:26:00 x25 ggoum .v 2an

35

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:2- :2- :2- .22 R2. 2 :2 22 $2 22 222-22- 52- :22- 2:25
22- 22- 22 22 e2- 22- 22 22 $2 22 2:2- 22- 22- 22- 22.5
22 22 22 22 $2 22- 22 :2- .2222- .2222 2 2 238.2...
22 :2 R2 22 22 22 222- R2- 22- 22. 22 :2- 22 22 3:22
:2 22 22 :222-ws2 22 22- .22- .32-222- 22 22 .22 23.8.2.2.”
83 5a 82232 925m ooom
22 $2 22 :2 22 $2 22- .2- 22- 22- 22 22- 22 22- .2...
:2- :2 22- a2 22- 22 E2 22- 22- .22- 22- 22. 22- .22- 2:25
:2- 22- 22 22 :2- 22. 22 22 :2 :2- 22 22 2- 2:2 .523
:2 22 22 22- 22 22 22- .22- :22- 22- .2222 $2 $2 23.8.2...
22 22 22 22- 22 22 E2- :2- 22. .22. .22 22. 22 22 2.....E2
.:2 .2252 £22.52 2 2.2- .22- .2222- .2222 .32 .222523.
E: 5m 2:8 52 own-52 ooom

e Ea

92 63 806 .32

:25 322 52 $22 :22 5.5 225 €an 2% ea. 22 $32. as:

a .z 52 2-225 8 2 24:2 2-82 2:2 2.282.222... 2 8:28 225

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.22 v a 8.865
.I. 98 mod v a 552cc“ _.. .85 355835 9 559:5 Sow Ea coon H8 555% 253 550 28 5885
25588 8m 8E 5m 8:555 3332 can $5858 8on 5252.. 8m mcocfloboo 5. 585on .m 25H

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

22- .2- 22- a2 22- 222 22 22 22 $2 22- 22.2-_22.2-%:.2- 22:25
22- 22- 22- :2 22- 2. 222 222 222 22 :2- 222-22- 22- a. 2.5
22- 22- 22. 22 22- 2- 2:2 222 22 22 N2. 22- 222- 22- 2222:
~82- 22- 22 $2 2.? 22 222 22 2.2- 22- :2 22- 22 $2 2222
22 22 22 22 :2 :2 22 2:2- 22- 22- 22 22- 22 22- 22.2.2...
:2 2:2 22 2- 222 :2. 22$ 2- 22- .2222 22- 22. 22 2.5222
.82 .2222 :22- .2222 222- .22- .22-22- .22222 :22 :222222522
52.. 8.2.3. 2...... 222
222. .2. 9.3 22 22- 22 22 222 22- 22- 22- 22- 22- .22- .22
:2- 22- 83 W22 2- 22 22.? 22 222 $2 222.22. 22- I22- 22:25
2- 22- 9:. E22 22- 2. 22 22 .2222 .2. 22- 22- 22- 22.2.5
:2- 22- .23 22 22.2.2.2- :22 22 .2222 22- 222. 22-22- 222.22:
22- 222. 22 22 22- 22 22 E2 :2- 22- E2 22. 22 22 2222
22 22 2:2 22 22- 22 2- s2- 22. 22- :2 E2 22 222 .2822..-
22 E2 N82. 22- 22 22 :2 22- 222- 22- .2222- 22 :2. 22.5.2
:2 .2222 ..§.2-§.2 2 23 .22- .22-22- 22 :2 :22 ..§2,...§_§§2
«85¢ :58 832 a2 88

e 22

22 as 288 £3

22 2.2 222 222 22 2.2 2.5 2.2 222 as. 2.5 as? .3...

a .2 .2 2.925 6 M 2-22 2.82 2.22 .252 2.23. =2 2228 9225

 

 

 

 

282.282 2 222

37

Table 6. Regression equations and variance (R2) explained by the environmental factors
(independent variables) for the dependent (plant) variables of abundance and relative
abundance for both summers. A dash (-) means there were no significant explanatory
vanables.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dependent Variable I Independent Vanables ] R2
2000 average stem countsfm ' ii i- °
S. mnericcmus -l 18(Cl) -46(ortho-P) -—264(NO3-N) —3 1(water 0.940

table) +78(conductivity) —105 (alkalinity)
M. arvensis 9.9(Cl) —5.8Lalkalinity) 0.349
A. lanceolatus 33.0(alkalinity) 0.229
Mira spp. - --
Other species -11 5(oonduct1v1ty)-15 2(alkal1mty) 0.452
2000 relauve abundance per plot fl
S. mericanus -0. 2(0) —0.1(ortho-P) —0.5(NO3-N) 0.908
+ .2(conductivity)- .3(alkalinity)
M. arvensis 0.02(Alkalinity)+0.03(Cl) 0.389
A. Ianceolatus 0.1(water table) +0.1(ortho—P) 0.388

T who spp. -0. 1(water table) 0.369
Other species -0. l(conduct1v1ty)—0 2(NO3 -N) 0.585
2001 average stem counts/m ..... '* ‘ " "*7: 'i- if
S. americanus 54. 4(water table) + 84. 8(pH)-99. 4(ortho-P) 0.895

+120. 3(conductivity)
M arvensis +6.1(alkalinity) 0.248
A. lanceolatus -- -

T. latzfolia 1.2(conductivit1) + 1.6(ortho-P) 0.494
71 angustg'folia -5.4(oonductivity) 0.292
T min spp. - --

Other species -28. 4(water table)-l 3. 6(alkalm1ty) 0.677

2”! relanve abundance per plot , . " H f.'"575;"7"T‘frgj'f?’5?if?"$5739.32,g5
S. mericanus 0. 1(water table) —0. 2(ortho-P)+0 2(conduct1v1ty) 0.854

M arvensis -

A. lanceolatus 0.1(ortho-P) 0.268

71 latrfolia 0.004(water table) +0.009(ortho-P) 0.733
71 angustfi'olia -0.02(conductivity) 0.311
T ”In spp. 0.02(ortho-P)+0.01 (water table) -0.02(conductivity) 0.497
Other species -0.2(water table) -0.06(alkalinity) 0.827

 

 

 

38

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   
 
  
 
  
   
 

 

S. americanus
patch

Forested
wetland

Agricultural

Figure la. Location of the Maple River salt seep. The insert shows a map of
Michigan with the ¥ indicating the location of the Maple River salt seep in
Clinton County, Michigan. The larger map is a landscape overview of the
Maple River salt seep.

39

 
      
  

Forested MM . .
wetland wtgustlfoha

dominated

Forested
wetland

 

angusnfolia

20m
|—-l

Figure lb. The Maple River salt seep wetland indicating dominant
plant characteristics and location of transects.

40

.3538 8a m 23 < 8855. 20:3 88:2: men: 35.3 x25
BE. .83 some com 8833 085 85 own—26 new 880% ESQ SEE mo ooow 8m 828988“ gum—om .N oBmE

 

 

 

 

 

m «oomcmt. AEV noon on 00:53.0 < woomcmt.
om on or em. up om 0v ON. 00.
. $0

$0?
$0N m
wacNOtoEN .w § $0M” a
niacin .5. I $ov m.

maaflooocm. .< m £00m
cam 93>... D $om W
dam .550 I $05 .m
Room 0.
o\oom m.

$00?

 

 

 

 

41

.3383... En m was < 885; a 80:3 88.9.. 3:: v2.3.” v.35 2....
.83 some 8.. 33.3.6 035 8.. 33.83 98 8.8% :8... .8me .0 Son 8.. 805.23% 2623. .m 23mm

 

 

 

 

 

 

m 83:9... .5. comm 3 cocfimfi. < .035;
O». cm or. co? co cm om- om.

$0
8
or
$8 m.
mac—3.58m .w § m
m_wcm2m .s. I o\oov m.
8588.“... .< m w
B
aam 9.9.... D $8 w
dam $50 I M
a
oxoom .m
M

 

o\ooo..

 

42

 

62822:. m .23 < .828. 82.3 38 >258 :25

2.. .o 5.88. 2.. 82.2.2: :5 3 353% 2.... .58 coon o. Codvn. .n.w.ou~b 5.3.088 .o 2:222.
3:86 .2. A2808 ofiogaéoa 8.. mo. away. no .68.. amodumv 3:58 8on :38 3am... €53.in
.22. 83 Sea .8863 ..oom .28 coon 8.. hangings .m. 8.. N8 .2. :53 8on $803.. .v 95m...

 

.E. 3:529

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

88 om. 8. cm 8 ow om o ow- o..- 8..
m 28¢. . . -4. . . o
Son 8. M
< 9.8.9 I ID: I CON ow
coon com m
, o9.
coca r w. . m
< 28.... ll xi. .fl. W com R
K I , x
e r. 26 m.

 

 

 

con

 

43

 

80.00888. m. .28 < .0028...

0.2.3 808 28888. 82.0 2... .0 80.800. 2.. 880.88. 8o 8 00888... 2.... 6.82. 8003.2. Soda. .3868...
8:88 225 828.088 .0 8.8.88 .28 8:8... 825 0.03 .2808 0508888808 80.. .8. 8m... 80 808.
08.6"... 38800 808 8.8.). ..oo~ .28 ooom 80.. 8.8838 .3. 80.. N8 .2. .8800 808 08.03.. .m 08%...

 

 

 

.oom

m. 28.... . . .4. . .
.oom

< 288... I no: I
Doom

m8....l.i.|

coca
< 28.... lol

 

 

 

ON. co.

.5. 3:505

ow 00 O? om

 

 

o om- ow- ow-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N
fim
o
N
zul/mnoo wens afimaAV

 

 

/ x
/ .5 8
2v x E 0...
a x
/r’ \\ W~ mm
.8 K on

 

 

 

 

 

44

.fiouooaofium m mug < Hoomfidb 0.533 no.8

.3088. 8080 05 .0 80.800. 05 0080.08. 85 8 0288.0 2.... .080» 500 80.. 8000 0803 20.38.836.48.
80.8.0008 (.0 08.80.88 8.88.0 .088 880088 0508889808 80.. .00. 8m.m 80 .0002. 30.0"...
38800 88.0 8828 .8..E.m .38 .088 ooom .80.. 88.00088. .V 80.. N88 808 .8800 E08 0w880>< .0 088m...

 

 

 

.OON
m. 28.8% . . .4. . .

.oom
< 28.8... I In: I

OOON
m. 88.8... IT

ooom
< 08.0.8... Incl:

 

 

 

.E. 02.3.0.0 -

ON. 00. ow om ow ON

0 ON- ow- ow-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I /
\
\
III...
o
o
N
zul/mnoo was afimaAv

 

 

 

omm

 

 

45

 

820008008. m .28 < 0000288

002.3 808 2.2.8.8 8080 05 ..0 80.800. 2.. 0080.08. 85 8 00880.0 2.... .0808 52. 80. 8000 08 A.o.OV8
.32.qu 80.8.0008 ..0 08.8288 8.88.0 .088 .2828 0508888808 80.. .02 8w.0 80 .0002. Noodnnc
0.8800 8820 28088 .8..8.m ..oom .088 OOON 00.. .880 3.88.. 80.. N28 808 .8800 8820 02203. .8 0.82m...

 

 

.OON
mag... 54...
.OON
< 028.8... IInII
OOON

mgr—1+

OOON
< 0288... IITI

 

 

 

.E. 8:805

ON. OO. Om O0 O8 ON

 

 

 

O ON- Ow- OO-

 

 

 

 

 

 

./ O V

O. M

u

/< \i. ON 8%
8

/ a 00 m.

K. ... m

... O... m

4 00 w

 

 

 

O
\O

 

 

46

00800.28. m. 088 < 8008.. 0.2.3 808 80088. 8080 2.. .0 80.800.
2.. 0080.08. 8.0 8 0088.0.0 2.... .0808 .000 .0. 8000 08 ..o.ov8 wand"... 80.8.0008 .0 08.0.88 8.28.0

088 .0808. 00808888808 .0. .00. 8m.0 80 0002. 3.178. 0.8800 8.0.0 8828 8..E.m .03 088 ooom
.0. 80.0080 8088.800 .0 888.880 m8.08.08. .08. 00.0080 .200 .0. N8. .08 .8800 8.0.0 02203. .w 02%...

 

.8. 0080.05

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ON.. OO_. om OO 0.0 ON O ON- 0v- 00..
.000 0
m 080:. Ed...

00 m.
room .. . «I V O.» a
< 080... lml \\ .. .. .. 8 //u m
w k ~ / 00 a
OOON \ . . . , f s
m 080.... I LT I ,. “a / om m.
0000 N W 0‘ 00. o
< 080.... ll ... H ON. m
m. 00. m”

0 00.

 

 

 

 

 

OOF

 

 

47

80800.88. m 888 < 8008.. 0.083 80.8 88.088. 8080

08. 80 80.800. 0... 0080.88. 8.0 8 0088.0... 08... .080» 8.3 .08 8000 08 Co.ov8 680..."... 80.8.00008
..0 08.0..88 8.88.0 888 @8808. 08.08.888.808 .08 .00. 8m.0 80 8008p vmvdflfi 00.0080 80 888.88 8808.
8..E.m .82. 888 coon .0.. .28 .08 08.8888 00.8. :8 8. 8. 8880.. 00.0080 80 888.88 8.0. 08... .8 088.8

 

:5 0088.05

ON. OOF OO Om Ov ON O ON- O? OO-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0
.008 8
mmcm.._.:.4.:
.008 v #
(08.0.th w.
0008 .0 s
mmcm.._.l+l m .m.
0008 m
<008PIo| 0. m.
8. .0.
w.

 

 

 

 

 

 

(D
‘—

 

48

 

80800.0.8. m 888 < 80088.. 0.083 808 88888. 8080 08. ..0 80.800. 0... 00.80.88. 85 .8 0088.0...
08% 080088.. 8.2. .0.. .OON ..0 88.8.80 8.0... 8000 .80 0... ..0 008.388.0800 8.88.80 .88 m8..80 08H .8. 0.8m...

 

 

.8... 0080.05
ON. oo. 00 00 08 08 0 cm. 0.... 00.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

=3
m88.8....o:. _ . 0 _ _ . . L L w b L F . b _ b _ O
88.85 OOO_. m
m catlhl 0008
$8.5..- 83 W
88880 OOOv m

<80.._..I6|

 

 

OOOm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OOOO

 

49

 

...0.000.0.8. m .88 < 80088.. 0.083 808 82.88. 8080 0... ..0 80.800. 0... 0080.88. 8.0 8 0088.0... 08...
.808 .0 w8..80 0... 8. 00.8880 .083 8.0... 80.8. 80088.. 8080 .0. 080.8..800800 80 .088 .U 08... .2 0.8m...

 

 

.E. 0088.0...
08. 00. 08 00 08 08 0 08- 0... 00-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

O
OON
m
08.80 6 00.8
< 000
80....00l..fl.| 00w
0
080.... .0 Illl COO —. m
< OON.
088.... .0 IIOI...
003.
000.

 

 

 

 

OOm —.

 

 

50

 

80800.88. m. ..88 .8 80088.. 0.083 808 8.0.8.8 8080 0... ..0 80.800. 0... 00.80.08. 85 .8 0088.0... 0......
..OON ..0 m8..80 0... 8. 00.8880 .083 .80... 80.8. 80088.. 8080 .0. 080.8..800800 87. 088 8.8.8.8 08... .N. 08.8.8

 

:5 3:500

 

 

 

m 088:. 82 :6...

 

< 088.. 8238.:
m 088:.
.._c__8.__<|._|

< 088...
>._c__8.=< IT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

51

...0.000.0.8. m ..88 < 800.8... 0.0....» 80.8 8....88. 8080 0... ..0 80.800. 0... 0080.88. 85 .8 0088.0... 08...
.83 ..0 m8...80 0... 8. 00.8880 .083 8.0... 80.8. .00088... ..080 .0. 080.8..800800 2-007. ..88 v. 08... .m. 088....

 

£005.30
08. 00. 00 00 08 08 0 08.. 0? 00.

 

 

 

OI“.
,4. .

‘. r
7
>

m 080....

O

. , . . 8

2-002 :6:- x. / 2 \ .. A...\ /.h x v
< 080.... . / \0/ K L x 8. < ,- m
2-802....«i 4. «\ /o>...o. A..." ,4 0

m .. . /
080.....v.l.lll /~ X 00W

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N.
080.8.MIIOI K / v.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

52

...0.000.0.8.. m. ..88 < 80088.. 0.083 808 8....88. 8080 0... ..0 80.800. 0... 0080.88. 85 .8 0088.0... 08... .53
..0 w8..80 0... 8. 00.8880 .083 8.0... 88.8. 80088.. ..080 .0.. 080..8..800800 805.0 ..88 2......2 0.... .8. 0.8m...

 

.588885
08. 00. 00 00 08 08 0 08. 0... 00.

r 0.1.. .\.L«I_..¢I_:¢ -0-.. . _L 0
m080.._. \. .8. 0..
0-25:6... w. 7 0.0-. . 00.0
\ /. ..
8-8;tolai . m ..0
. \ z ..
2612+ .. 0.0 w
(080.... / N <
/ ~

ZuVIZ IIOII / \ ¢. N.O

K mNO

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

md

 

53

 

 

...0.000.0.8. m ..88 < 80088.. 0.083 80.8 8....88. 8080 0... ..0 80.800. 0... 0080.08.
85 .8 0088.0... 0...... .OON ..0 ..88 0... 8. 80.80808. 80088.. ..080 .0.. 0.88. .083 0... ..0 8.80.. 08... .m. 0.8m...

 

..E. 0008.08.
08. 00. 00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OO Ov ON O ON. OW. OO.
fl » om:
,,.. \ mm.
m .
mam... . . ..u. . . ON: 0.
a
< m..- W
mcmt. ill \I
I O
O_. W
m:
. . . o
m

 

 

 

 

54

 

6309.285 m 98 < $85.: 98:3 «8“ >258 demo of mo 5:82 05 83065 :5 “a 353%
2E. .58 mo macaw 05 E 8388 $33 80¢ :83 8355 :08 SO in Ea 832388 BC. .3 Emmi

 

:5 8:33

ON_‘ 03 ow OO Ov om o ON- ow. OO-

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

 

 

AYo'ulfllnII ‘\nhollu+honnt union: fl-mH6-‘n&ullllw
mmcmfiza...o.: ..w b . w

 

 

<mcmfi1anéi S
mmcmc.

NP
2398:.8. IT 2 \Y\\/
< mam; . o\ I. I 1. 3
E39883. IT A -\-\\ <

I or

 

 

 

 

(30) dwal pue Hd

 

 

 

 

 

 

2‘

 

55

 

£98m 350 ES 3 3:22.80 S: 0.8 «£83 553, «on 0.8 85 898m 3:8 :28 8 332.80 30383: .08
Ho: mm .850 05 28 3.5.825 mm v.83 one 533 E Bouofl Sn flown—obg 3338a 2m wondrous: “on 53 .5 3:233:
63 08 3.53 05 £023 E £98m .223 088 05 ESE 358:8 2a cows—2.50 0.8 35 £98.“ gaoacohém .2 033m

       

 

EBEdem... wwwwww

 

33:03:00

2an .995
2 £an

56

ter 3: Water Chem' and Biota o a Brine Pond Corn 1 in Midlan
Michigan
Introduction

Human impacts have increased saline areas in the Midwest by urbanization, road
salt runoff, agricultural runoff, municipal and industrial waste discharge, and salt mining
(Waisel 1972, Ungar 1974). For example, salting of roads in Wayne County, Michigan,
has created saline wetlands with a unique community of nonmative salt tolerant species
(Reznicek 1980). Commercial salt mining in Michigan began in the mid 18003 (Catling
and McKay 1981, Cook 1914, Allen 1918). As a result of mining activities, saline
environments with a variety of non-native salt tolerant plants developed (Farwell 1916,
Brown 1917).

Another example of a created saline habitat due to industrial use of brine wells is
at the Dow Chemical Company in Midland, MI. Spent brine resulting from Dow
operations has been released since the 19303 into a constructed pond complex (Figure 1).
This lBO—acre pond complex consists of four interconnected ponds that are chemically
distinct; salinity is lowest in the north-south (N-S) pond and increases in salt levels to the
east-west (E-W) and main ponds. The main and outlet ponds are chemically identical
and will not be considered as separate ponds in this paper.

The main pond has a layer of inorganic salt sediments ranging from 0 to 15 feet
thick (Hydrogeologcial study 1990) covering naturally occuning soils. These sediments
precipitated fi’om spent brine and contain NaCl, CaClz, MgCl, FeClz, FeOHCl, CaCOs,
MgOl-ICI, Ca803, and Mg(OH)z (Physical description 199]). Three colors of sediments

are present and all contain large amounts of NaCl, and CaClz, but vary in concentration

57

of the other salts. Fer is a major component in the dark red-brown sediments, CaCO3
and CaSO3 are highly concentrated in the tan sediments and Mg(OH)2 is a main
component of the white sediments (Physical description 1991). A composite sample of
sediments was also tested for metals, total organic carbon (TOC), and volatile organic
compounds. The Resources Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metals were all
below background levels for Michigan, the volatile organics were all below
recommended levels for cleanup, and TOC was less than 0.03% (Saxena 1990).

The spent brine water pumped into the ponds during active extraction of salts
fi'om brine wells was composed mainly of water and C302 (17.6%), NaCl (6.5%),
Fe(OH)3 (4.6%), M8C12 (3.2%), and Fe(OH)2 (1.6%) (Oct 29, 1971 analysis in Delaney
1989). In January 1989, the average chloride concentration was 35,933 mg/L, sodium
was 6,143 mg/L, magnesium was 1,767 mg/L, calcium was 14,567 mg/L, total dissolved
solids (TDS) was 62,321 mg/L, total suspended solids (TSS) was 27.7 mg/L, and TOC
was 6.3 mg/L (Physical description 1991). No volatile or extractable organic compounds
were found in the water (Physical description 1991). Thus, the main chemical
components of brines that would have affected the biota in the Dow pond complex during
active extraction of brines were water and salt. At the time of this study in 2001, brine
extraction had ceased and the brine wells were undergoing remediation by dilution with
freshwater resulting in a fi'eshening of the water in the ponds as remediation continued.

Because of differences in salinity in the three ponds in the complex, this brine
pond complex representsa unique, highly salinated pond environment found nowhere
else in Michigan. Since highly salinated aquatic systems other than those associated with

brines resulting from industrial activities, salt mining or oil well drilling are rare in

58

Michigan, the brine pond provides the opportunity to determine what types of organisms
will tolerate and inhabit such environments.

To investigate the organisms present in this saline environment, I surveyed the
biota present in and around the brine pond complex. I identified algae, plants,
invertebrates, and vertebrates in the N-S, E-W, and main ponds. Also, I compared the
water chemistry of each pond.

b'ectiv and H t eses

The first objective of my study was to inventory the biota existing in and around
Dow pond complex to determine the nutrient and food web basis. Since the ponds were
chemically distinct, I hypothesized that the biota would be different in each pond. I
hypothesized that the pond with the freshest water (N -S pond) would have a greater biotic
diversity than the more saline ponds (main pond), since few saline environments occur in
Michigan that could provide a source of salt tolerant organisms (MNFI). I surveyed
rooted wetland plants along pond margins, algal communities in the pond water column
and on the sediments, and the animals (vertebrates and invertebrates) living in and around
flu3pond.

W

W

Dow pond: A detailed description of the history and chemistry of the Dow brine pond
complex is given above. Phragmites australis dominated several areas around the edges
of the pond, and Chara sp. dominated the N-S and grew in small patches in the E-W

ponds.

59

Survey of Biota - The Dow pond complex was surveyed for benthic (bottom-dwelling)
and planktonic (water column dwelling) algae, vascular plants, invertebrates, and
vertebrates by sampling along the shores of the four ponds and from a pontoon boat in the
main pond. Water samples were taken once in early spring to determine nutrient and salt
concentrations in the Dow pond complex. The surface of the sediments in the main pond
was covered with a felt-like mat of organic material with algae growing on or in it.
Benthic algae were sampled by taking approximately 30 cm2 sections of this surface mat
back to the laboratory for microscopic identification. Planktonic algae were sampled
using a standard plankton tow net (64 um mesh size). Samples were preserved in 6:3:1
(60% water, 30% ethanol and 10% formalin) for laboratory identification. Algae were
identified by Ms. Kalina Manoylova at Michigan State University.

Invertebrates were sampled using a 500 um mesh, standard D—frame aquatic dip
net. Captured invertebrates were preserved in ethanol and taken to the laboratory for
identification. Since the main pond is significantly larger than the N-S and E-W ponds,
the majority of sampling occurred in the main pond. To standardize for sampling effort,
the average number of species per sample was calculated by dividing the total number of
species found in each pond by the number of invertebrate or algae samples taken per
pond.

Wetland plants were surveyed by recording the plant species present around the
pond and mapping the general distribution of these plants around the pond (Figure 1).
Visual observations from the shore or evidence of animal use or presence (e. g., deer

tracks, toad carcasses) were used to identify vertebrates at the pond.

60

am
Water Chemistry - The N-S pond was the fi'eshest of the three ponds in the Dow pond
complex (the main pond and outlet pond were grouped as one since they were chemically
similar), having the lowest conductivities and TDS concentrations (Table 1). However,
specific ions and nutrients were not tested on this pond. The main pond had higher
conductivities, TDS, Ki, Ca“, Na+, and Cl' concentrations, and the lower nitrate and
ammonia concentrations compared to the E“! pond (Table 1). Dissolved oxygen
concentrations during the day were often greater than 100 % throughout the pond
complex, indicating supersaturation in each of the ponds. Compared to 12 years ago
(Table l), the water in the main pond was fresher in 2001.
Algae - The sediments in the main pond were covered with a thick organic mat of
unknown origin. Although the origin of the mat was not specifically determined, it is
probable that benthic algae and bacteria accumulating over time formed the organic mat
(biofilm) on the pond bottom. The matrix was often more than 15 mm thick and cohesive
enough to be pulled up in large pieces. On the west half of the main pond, the mat was
textured and colored brown and black. On the east half of the main pond, the mat was
slightly thinner, less textured and tan colored. The underside of the mat had a black, felt-
like appearance, indicating anaerobic conditions.

The thick organic mat covering the sediments was primarily found in the main
pond. The N-S pond was deeper than the main pond and completely covered with Chara
sp., so no sediments were visible. The E-W pond was deeper than the main pond,

however, in shallow areas, thin patches of organic matrix spotted the sediments.

61

Sixteen species of microscopic algae and one macroscopic alga (Chara sp.) were
identified in samples fi‘om the Dow pond complex (Table 2). Almost all 17 algal species
identified were benthic species associated with the organic mat covering the bottom.
Very few algae were collected in plankton tows. The main pond contained seven species
of diatoms (Bacillariophyta), five species of blue-green algae (Cyanophyta), and one
species of green algae (Chlorophyta) (Table 2). The main pond contained the highest
number of species, but the N-S pond contained the highest number of species per sample.
Macrophytes - Several dense stands of the common reed (Phragmites australis) grew
along the edges of the ponds in the Dow pond complex. Most of these stands grew in soil
in the comers of the ponds except for one medium sized stand on the western end of the
main pond. The largest stand of common reeds grew in the southwest corner of the main
pond by Overlook Park (Figure 1) in an area where soil had been pushed into the edge of
the pond during construction of the park. In the large stand of common reed in this area,
many long rhizomes extended along the soil surface and into the pond water. The
rhizomes appeared not to grow in areas where the gel-like substrates that formed the
bottom of the ponds in most places were not covered with at least some soil. In other
areas, the common reed grew along the apparent high water mark established in prior
years with few, if any, stems growing in or near the water. As a result, most of the stands
were well away fiom the water in 2001, since water in the Dow pond was lower than
former high water levels during the growing season.

On the west end of the main pond above the water line, a few stems of
Schoenoplecruspungens (three-square bulrush) were present in one small area of the

pond, however, they were not very well established or vigorous. A small patch of Twha

62

wrguslz‘folia (narrow-leafed cattail) was also formd above the water line on the west end
of the main pond. In the E-W pond, a stand of 71 angustrfolia and Juncus sp. (rush) was
also found. I mgmtrfolm was very common along the edges of the adjacent waste
treatment pond just south of E-W pond.

In the N-S pond, Chara sp. (a macro-alga) was very abundant throughout the
water column By late summer, it had moved into the E-W pond. Several ducks were
observed feeding in these beds of Chain. Invertebrates were also relatively abundant in
these Chara beds.

Macminvertebrates - Two families of true flies (Diptera), the biting midges (no—see-
ums, Ceratopogonidae) and shore or brine flies (Ephydridae), were widely distributed
throughout the pond complex (Table 3). These two families of flies were found as larvae
and pupae in all ponds, and were the only invertebrates found in the middle of the main
pond. Adult brine flies were also seen in large swarms around the edges of the pond
during much of the summer. The biting midge larvae were very abundant in the main
pond, but were much rarer in the E-W and N-S ponds, whereas the brine fly larvae were
lower in abundances but were more evenly distributed throughout all ponds. Two other
families of dipterans, the long-legged flies (Dolichopodidae) and midges (Chironomidae)
were found in low numbers from the main pond. Three beetle families (Coleoptera) and
one family of true bugs (the water boatrnen (Corixidae, Hemiptera» were found in the
main pond. Many of the same species were found in the NS pond, but
macroinvertebrates in this pond also included additional families of true bugs (back-
swimmers, Notonectidae), damselflies and dragonflies (Odonata), mayflies

(Bphemeroptera), and seed shrimp (Ostracoda). The E-W pond contained the largest

63

number of species including a combination of species collected from the other ponds as
well as some additional groups of dragonflies, beetles and water mites (Hydracarina,
Arachnida) (Table 3). However, the N-S pond had the greatest number of species per
sample, followed closely by the E-W pond.

Vertebrates Observed - No plans were made to quantify use of the ponds by vertebrates
during 2001; however, we recorded species observed (Table 4). The most commonly
observed vertebrates at the Dow pond were birds. We observed at least 14 species using
the ponds or pond berms. These included geese (Canadian and Domestic), swans, mallard
ducks, double-crested cormorants, Great blue herons, gulls (probably Herring and Ring-
Bill), terns (Least and Common), shore birds (killdeer, dunlin, and unidentified
sandpipers), and bank swallows. Several species of waterfowl and shore birds were
present throughout the summer. Mixed flocks of birds, especially gulls and terns, were
ofien concentrated on the small island in the middle of the main pond. Mallard ducks
with ducklings were seen in the N-S and E-W pond, indicating that this species uses the
pond for rearing young.

Mammal use of the Dow pond was either directly observed (woodchucks) or
physical signs (e. g. tracks, fecal deposits, decaying carcasses) of them indicated their
presence. Deer tracks were commonly seen around Dow pond and a decaying deer
carcass was observed along the southeastern shore of the main pond. In the spring,
several bloated, toad (Brgfo americanus) carcasses were seen in the water by Overlook

Park. No amphibians were seen in or around the pond any other time

We

Water Chemistry - The major ions in the Dow pond were Cl’ and Ca2+. Ca2+ ion
concentrations were approximately three times higher than sodium, and more than 10
times higher than potassium. Wetlands with high calcium ions are not uncommon in
Michigan, however, the high concentration found in the main pond of the Dow Brine
Pond Complex (about 100 times higher concentration) is unique (Schwintzer and
Tomberlain 1982). The Main pond had TDS concentrations (17-25 g/L) 3 times as high
as the E—W pond, and 4 times higher than the freshest N-S pond. The conductivity in the
main pond (24-38.5 mS) was twice as high as the E-W pond and four times higher than
the N-S pond.

Compared to concentrations of natural saline areas in Michigan such as the Maple
River salt seep (see Chapter 2), the conductivities in the N-S pond (2-9.5mS) were
comparable to the Schoenoplecms dominated areas at the seep (1.8-5mS). Ocean water
has a TDS around 35g/L, about 1/3 to '/2 times more concentration than the Dow main
pond. Similar to the Dow pond, the main anion is Cl‘, but the main cation in ocean water
is Na+ not Ca2+ (Fortescue 1980).

The chloride concentration in the E-W pond is higher than the TDS values. The
ion concentrations were measured only one time, whereas several TDS samples were
taken throughout the summer, so the individual chloride ion concentrations are
unconfirmed. Additional testing should be done to resolve this discrepancy.

Algae - Only 17 algal species were found in the Dow pond complex. This is relatively
low species richness compared to most fieshwater systems (Stewart et al. 1999). Many

freshwater systems support from 100-300 species of algae (Stewart et al. 1999), however,

65

the diatom community in various saline habitats can range from 10 species to 100 species
(Blinn 1993, Sullivan 1975, Cumming and Smol 1993). Thus my findings of 10 diatom
species is on the low end compared with other studies.

Despite the low species richness of algae, they appear to be abundant enough to
supersaturate the water with oxygen (% oxygen saturation of the pond water exceeded
100% during the day). Such supersaturated conditions indicate high rates of primary
production. Oxygen produced by photosynthesis has to exceed loss of oxygen to the
atmosphere and respiration of all organisms in the pond for supersaturation to occur.

Most of the diatom species identified are wide spread and inhabit a wide variety
of habitats, including saline habitats (Cumming and Smol 1993, Sullivan 1975, Patrick
and Reimer 1966). However, one species Eunotia incisa is often found in cool, clear
water with low dissolved mineral contents, especially low contents of calcium (Patrick
and Reimer 1966). Thus, this pond with high mineral contents is an atypical habitat for
this diatom species. The diatom, Cymber sp., was found in all ponds. This unidentified
species of Cymbella (Fig. 2) was an unusual species rarely found in the Midwestern lakes
or ponds. Ms. Kalina Manoylova, a PhD. student at Michigan State University who is
doing her dissertation on evolution of this genus, identified the algae for me. She has
never seen this species before despite having identified algae fiom around the world.

The blue-green algae found in this pond have salt tolerant species (Lyngbya spp.
and Spirulina spp., Prescott 1968) or survive in habitats such as stagnant pools or
polluted waters (Oscillatoria spp., Smith 1933, Prescott 1968). However, Chroococus

turgidus is normally found in acidic, soft water with a low Ca:K ratio such as Sphagnum

bogs ( Prescott 1968, 1978). This pond is an atypical habitat for this species of algae due
to the high Ca and mineral content and slightly basic pH.

Two species of green algae were found. Chara spp. are widely distributed and
found both in fresh and brackish waters (Prescott 1978). Commium is the largest genus
of green algae and contains thousand of species (Prescott 1978).

Macropbytes - The species richness of macrophytes in the Dow brine pond complex was
extremely low (four species). All the species found are considered salt tolerant (see App.
A). Even though saline habitats generally have low species richness of vascular plants
(Ungar 1991), four species is still lower than the species richness reported for many
saline habitats (Mitsch and Gosselink 2000, Shupe et al., 1986). Phragmites austmlis
was the dominant plant around the edges of the Dow pond complex. This species tends
to be an aggressive weed that is commonly found along roadsides throughout Michigan.
It can dominate an entire wetland (Hammer 1992). It is also known to tolerate salinity
levels as high as 27.5 ppt salinity (Chapman 1974). Therefore, the dominance of this
species in the plant community around the brine pond complex is not surprising.

The brine pond complex was not completely surrounded by vegetation (Figure 1),
and only Chara sp. (a macroalgae) was found in the N-S and part of the E-W ponds. No
plants, submersed or emergent, were found in the main pond even though the main pond
was 1-2 feet deep, suitable for some wetland plants. The gel-like sediments may have
inhibited plant establishment, and a t0p layer of topsoil may be needed for plants to
inhabit the pond.

The high salt content of this pond limits the growth of most native Michigan

wetland plants (App. 1). In addition, non-native plants from coastal areas may not adjust

67

to the differing salt content of this pond (high Cl and Ca) compared to ocean water (high
Cl and Na, Fortescue 1980). In addition, germination of seeds, which is likely the main
mechanism by which plants have come into this area, is strongly inhibited by high
salinity such as in the Dow pond (Ungar 1991)

Invertebrates - The greatest species richness of invertebrates (12 species) was found in
the E-W pond, and lowest richness (8 species) was found in the main pond. Ifthese data
are corrected for sampling effort (number of species per sample), the N-S pond had the
highest number of species per sample (4.5 species/sample) closely followed by the E-W
pond (4 species/sample). The biting midges, Ceratopogonidae, were most abundant
taxon in the main pond, but their numbers decreased as the ponds became fresher, being
nearly replaced by midges, Chironomidae in the N-S pond. In the fiesher waters of the
N-S pond, Ephemeroptera (mayflies) started to appear. The Odonata (dragonflies and
damselflies) were found in the N-S pond and the moderately salty E-W pond.

Dipterans, and some members of nearly every family of aquatic beetle,
Coleoptera are tolerant of salty water (Ward 1992). In contrast to my data, Ward (1992)
found that Chironomidae tended to be more salt tolerant than Ceratopogonidae.
Odonates, especially the dragonflies (damselflies are more rare) and the true bug
(I-Iemiptera) families of Corixidae and Notonectidae, are moderately tolerant of brackish
water (Ward 1992). Tricopterans and the Ephemereoptera family of Baetidae have a
lower tolerance of brackish water (Ward 1992). These salinity tolerances of invertebrate
groups fit well with my results.

The mean tolerance values for families indicated for North Carolina stream biotic

index indicated Odonates to be the most tolerant species of environmental stress,

68

followed by miscellaneous Dipterans, Coleoptera, Chironomidae and Ephemeroptera
(Lenat 1993). Hemipterans were not included in this study (Lenat 1993). Hilsenhoffs
tolerance classes developed for Wisconsin streams suggested that Chironomidae are the
most tolerant, followed by Odonata, Coleoptera, and miscellaneous Diptera, with
Ephemeroptera being the least tolerant (Hilsenhoff 1987). Not surprisingly given the
close proximity of Michigan and Wisconsin, Hilsenhoffs (1987) tolerance classes for
Wisconsin fits my data better than do the Lenat's (1993) tolerance classes for North
Carolina. Since the tolerance classes of I-Iilsenhoff and Lenat were primarily for stream
habitats, they may not apply to ponds and wetlands, which may have different biotic
indices than do stream habitats. Despite the fact that neither Hilsenhoff nor Lenat
worked specifically with salinity as a stress, the species that occurred in the Dow Brine
Pond complex included species listed by these authors as tolerant of stress.

The N-S pond was covered by the macroalga, Chara sp., which increases
habitable areas for invertebrates (Krecker 1939, Rosine 1955). This increased habitat
complexity and the fresher water in this pond may explain why it supported the greatest
number of invertebrate species per sample of any pond in the brine pond complex.
Inundated areas of the EW pond had patches of bare sediment without Chara
interspersed with areas with Chara present, whereas the main pond had no Chara present
throughout. Similarly, species of invertebrates present were greatest in the N-S pond,
intermediate in the E-W pond and lowest in the main pond. In the main pond,
Ephydridae and Ceratopogonidae were found throughout the pond, while all other
invertebrate families were found by the P. australis stand on the west end of the main

pond. This again suggests that invertebrate species richness was affected both by salinity

69

and habitat complexity associated with growth of macr0phytes in or near the margin of
the pond.

Vertebrates - In the spring, several bloated toad (Bufo americanus) carcasses were found
in the water in main pond by Overlook Park. They may have entered the water to breed
and not been able to leave because of rapid, osrnoregulatory driven changes in body
fluids due to the salt concentrations in the pond. No live amphibians were seen in the
ponds. Thus, this habitat is probably not suitable for amphibians.

Birds and deer (deer prints were frequently seen) use the Dow pond. Birds were
seen most often on or near the island and the berms in the main pond. Tems were seen
diving, indicating feeding most likely on the invertebrates in the pond (Robbins et al.
1983). Ducks and geese were most often seen in the E-W and N-S ponds. These ponds
had macrophytic algae, Chara sp., and a larger variety of invertebrates on which to feed.

In general, the biotic diversity of algae, plant and animals increased as the pond
water fi'eshened with the N-S pond having the greatest diversity in the pond complex. If
the pond complex water continues to freshen as it has since the last survey done in 1989
(Table 1), it is possible that the main pond could support a greater amount of diversity as
seen in the N-S and E—W ponds, especially if the main pond becomes fi‘esh enough to

become suitable habitat for Chara or other species of macrophytes.

70

W ited

Allen, R C. 1918. Mineral resources of Michigan for 1917 and prior years. Mich. Geol.
And Biol. Survey Publ. 27, Geo. Series 22.

Blinn, D. W. 1993. Diatom community structure along physiochemical gradients in saline
lakes. Ecology. 74: 1246-1263.

Brown, F. B. H. 1917. Flora of a Wayne County Salt Marsh. Michigan Academy of
Sciences Report. 19: 219

Catling, P. M. and S. M. McKay. 1981. A review of the occurrence of halophytes in the
eastern Great Lakes Region. Michigan Botanist 20: 167-179.

Chapman, V. J. 1974. Salt Marshes and Salt Deserts of the World. 2ml edition. Verlag -
Von J. Cramer, Germany.

Cook, W. C. 1914. The brine and salt deposits of Michigan. Mich. Geol. and Biol.
Survey Publ 15, Geo. Series 12. 188 pp.

Cumming, B. F. and J. P. Smol. 1993. Development of diatom-based salinity models for
paleoclimatic research from lakes in British Columbia (Canada). Hydrobiologia.
269/270: 179-196.

Delaney, W. June 13, 1989. RCRA Facility Investigation Phase I Environmental
Monitoring Report for Brine Management Areas of the Michigan Division of the
DOW Chemical Company, Midland, Michigan. DOW Chemical Company
Documents.

Farwell, O. A. 1916. New ranges for old plants. Rhodora. 18: 242-243.

Fortescue, J. A. C. 1980. Environmental Geochemistry. Springer-Verlag: New York.

Hammer, D. A 1992. Creating Freshwater Wetlands. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton.

Hilsenhoff, W. L. 1987. An improved biotic index of organic stream pollution. Great
Lakes Entomologist. 20: 3 1-3 9.

Hydrogeological Study: No6. Brine Pond Area (Text, Figures, and Tables). January 19,
1990. W Engineering and Science. DOW Chemical Company Documents.

Lenat, D. R. 1993. A biotic index for the southeastern United States: derivation and list of

tolerance values, with criteria for assigning water-quality ratings. J. N. Am.
Benthol. Soc. 12(3): 279-290.

71

Krecker, F. H. 1939. A comparative study of the animal population of certain submerged
aquatic plants. Ecology. 20: 553-562.

Mitsch, w. J. and J. G. Gosselink. 2000. Wetlands. 3"I ed. John Wiley and Sons, New
York

Patrick, R. and C. W. Reimer. 1966. The Diatoms of the United States Exclusive of
Alaska and Hawaii. Volume I. Monograph 13 of the Academy of Natural
Sciences of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Penn.

Prescott, G. W. 1978. How to Know the Freshwater Algae. 3” ed. McGraw-Hill, Boston.
Prescott, G. W. 1968. The Algae: A Review. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.

Physical Description, Chemical Characterization, and Preliminary Stabilization Studies of
Sediments in the No. 6 Brine Pond at DOW’s Michigan Division Midland Site.
January 3, 1991. DOW Chemical Company Documents.

Reznicek, A. A. 1980. Halophytes along a Michigan roadside with comments on the
occurrence of halophytes in Michigan.

Robbins, C. S., B. Brunn, and H. S. Zim. 1983. Birds of North America. 2"" ed. Golden
Press. New York.

Rosine, W. N. 1955. The distribution of invertebrates on submerged aquatic plant
surfaces in Muskee Lake, Colorado. Ecology. 36: 308-314.

Saxena, A September 21, 1990. Chemical Characterization of Untreated Min Pond
Sediment Composite Sample. GeoServices Inc. DOW Chemical Company
Documents.

Schwintzer, C. R and T. J. Tomberlin. 1982. Chemical and physical characteristics of
shallow ground waters in northern Michigan bogs, swamps and fens. Am. J. Bot.
69(8): 1231-1239.

Shupe, J. B., J. D. Brotherson and S. R Rushforth. 1986. Patterns of vegetation
surrounding springs in Goshen Bay, Utah County, Utah USA. Hydrobiologia.
139: 97-107.

Smith, G. M. 1933. The Fresh-Water Algae of the United States. McGraw-Hill, New
York

Stewart, P. M, J. T. Butcher, and P. J. Gerovac. 1999. Diatom (BacillariOphyta)

community response to water quality and land use. Natural Areas Journal. 19:
155-165.

72

Sullivan, M. J. 1975. Diatom communities from a Delaware salt marsh. J. Phycol. 11:
384-390.

Ungar, I. W. 1974. Inland halophytes of the United States. In Ecology of Halophytes. Ed
R. J. Reimbold and W. H. Queen. Academic Press, New York.

Ungar, I. W. 1991. Ecophysiology of Vascular Halophytes. CRC Press, Boca Raton.
Waisel, Y. 1972. Biology of Halophytes. Academic Press, New York

Ward, J. V. 1992. Aquatic Insect Ecology: 1. Biology and Habitat. John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., New York

Wilcox, D. A 1995. Wetland and aquatic macrophytes as indicators of anthropogenic
hydrologic disturbance. Natural Areas Journal. 15: 240-248.

73

Table 1. Water chemistry of the individual ponds in the Dow brine pond complex in 2001
compared to data from January 1989 (Physical description 1991). The main pond and
outlet ponds were combined since they were chemically similar. “n.d.” indicates non-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

detectible, an “—“ indicates parameters not sampled.

Parameters N-S pond E—W pond Main Pond Jan 1989 data
TDS (g/L) 2-6 3.5-8 17-25 61.8-62.7
Conductivity (mS) 2-9.5 5.5-16.5 24-3 8.5 —

N03 —N (mg NIL) —— 0.33 0.13-0.24 —

NH4 —N (mg N/L) — 2.94 0.69-0.77 —
Potassium (K, mg/L) — 329 414-441 ——
Calcium (Ca, mg/L) — 4408 5400-5795 13,600-16,300
Ortho-Phosphorus (mg/L) — n.d. n.d. —
Manganese (Mn, mg/L) — 0.2 0.2 —
Sodium (Na, mg/L) — 1377 1728-1874 5240-7860
Chloride (Cl, mg/L) —— 10,600 12,315-14,065 34,700-36,800
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) — — 7.77-8.74 —

% oxygen saturation —— — 92.9-103 ——
Alkalinity (mg CaC03/L) — —— 67-75 —

pH — — 8 ——

 

74

 

Table 2. Algal species collected from at the Dow pond complex, including the number of
samples (in parentheses), location (Main, E-W, and N-S), total number of species and
average number of species per sample in which each species was found. The “X” indicate
a species was present and “—“ indicates the species was absent fiom a location

 

 

 

 

Division Species Frequency Location
(14 Main(11) E-W(2) N-S(1)
samples)
Cyanophyta Chroococcus turgidus 2 X — —
(blue-green) Lyngbya Iagerheimia 1 X —- —
Oscillatoria mimesotense 5 X — —
Oscillatoria tennis 1 X — —
Spirulr'm major 5 X — —
Bacillariophyta Achnanthes minurissima 2 — X X
(diatoms) Amphora libyca 1 X — —
Amphora sp. 1 X — —
Anomoeoneis vilrea 2 — X X
Cymbella microcephala 1 X —— —
Cymbella sp. 10 x x x
Denticula cf kuetzingii 2 —— X X
Eunotr'a incisa 1 X — —
Navicula sp. 5 X X —
Navicula tn'prmctata 1 X —-— —
Chlorophyta Chara sp. (macroalgae) 1 — X X
(green) Cosmw'ium cf minor 2 X — X
Total # species 13 6 6
Avg # spp/sample 1.2 3 6

 

75

Table 3. The orders and families of macroinvertebrates found in the Dow pond complex
showing the number of samples (in parentheses), locations (Main, E-W and N-S), total
number of species found and number of species/per sample in which each family was
found. An “X” indicates presence an “——-“ indicates absence in a location.

 

 

 

 

Order Family Frequency Location
(13 samples) Main(8) E-W(3) N-S(2)
Diptera (true flies) Ceratopogonidae 12 X X X
Ephrydridae 12 X X X
Chironomidae 8 X X X
Dolichopodidae l X —— —-
Coleoptera (beetles) Dytiscidae 4 X X X
Elmidae 1 X — —-
Hydrophilidae 1 X — —
Haliplidae 1 — X —
Hemiptera (true bugs) Corixidae 3 X X —
Notonectidae 2 — X X
Odonata (dragonflies Coenagrionidae 5 — X X
and damselflies) Corduliidae 2 -— X X
Aeshnidae 1 — X —
Ephemeroptera Baetidae l —— — X
(mayflies)
Ostracoda (seed 3 —— X X
slm'mp)
Arachnid (water mites) Hydracarina 1 — X ——
Total # of species 8 12 9
Avg # spp/sample 1 4 4.5

 

76

Table 4. Vertebrates found at the Dow pond.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Birds
Bank swallow Gulls
Canada geese Killdeer
Common tern Least tern
Domestic geese Mallards (with ducklings)
Dunlin Sandpipers
Double-crested cormorant Swan
Mammals
Woodchuck Deer (tracks)
Others
Toads (deceased)

77

.86on ESQ me 8:82 08 wEBoam c8388 econ >59 0% me 3293 ._ oBmE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.8 5:

Queens: .5 32 58800 a
ASSBV 38» x32 ®
Assesses 5 :35 O
3555 find 0

58.139533 0
them.

 

Em

 

 

 

78

 

Figure 2. Unknown Cymbella spp. of benthic diatom algae that was common found in
the Dow pond.

79

Chapter 4; Growth of Salt Tflrant mt: in ; Bring 59d Stgrm
Water Pond in Miebi an

Introduction

Environmental conditions strongly influence the composition and structure of a
plant community. In ponds and wetlands, plants must deal with the stresses of saturated
or inundated soils in which oxygen levels in the root zone are low (Sculthorpe 1967). In
salty environments such as along ocean coastlines, plants must deal with high osmotic
pressures in the external environment caused by high salt concentrations, in addition to
dealing with low oxygen levels in the root zone (Waisel 1972, Queen 1974). Plants have
developed several mechanisms to deal with high salt including: succulence (Ungar 1991),
accumulation of ions or organic compounds (Broome et al. 1995, Ewing et al. 1989),
secretion of salts by salt glands or salt hairs (Waisel 1972), and selective or restrictive ion
absorption (Queen 1974, Ungar 1991).

In the wetter regions of the midwestern United States, saline wetlands and ponds
are historically rare, usually only occurring over fossil salt beds or in the vicinity of salt
springs (Waisel 1972). Thus, few native halophytes occur in these areas (Catling and
McKay 1981). However, human impacts have increased saline areas in the Midwest by
urbanization, road salt runoff, agricultural runoff, and municipal and industrial waste
disclmrge (Waisel 1972, Ungar 1974, Williams et al. 1997).

The brine pond at the Dow Chemical Company in Midland, Michigan, has been
strongly impacted by salinity. Since highly salt impacted areas are relatively rare in
Michigan, this pond provided an opportunity to investigate types of plants that could

tolerate this habitat after being transplanted into it.

80

The objective of this study was to identify salt tolerant, native Michigan vascular
plants that could be used to create wetlands along the margins of the Dow brine pond
complex. I assumed that diversifying the plant community would enhance wildlife
habitat and encourage use of the pond by a greater diversity of organisms. I hypothesized
that native Michigan wetland plants with a high salt tolerance could be used to establish
and expand wetland habitat in and around the Dow pond. Four species of emergent
wetland plants: common md (Phragmites austmlis), narrow leaf cattail (Typha
angusafolia), three square bulrush (Schoenopleclus prmgens), and Olney’s three square
bulrush (S. amen'cwms) were used in the transplant study.

Mngds and Materials
Si ' i n

Dow pond - The structure, water chemistry and biota of the Dow brine pond
complex are discussed in detail in Chapter 3. An open sandy bank of the main pond was
selected for the transplanting experiment (Figure 1). This area had been submerged by
pond water in 2000 and prior years according to Dow employees, but water levels had not
reached this area in 2001 by the time the rhizome/stem sections of the four selected plant
species were transplanted into plots for the experiment. Based on conversations with
DOW employees, I assumed that this area would be inundated during the growing
season. Unfortunately, this proved to be an incorrect assumption. All growth experiments
occurred in the main pond of the Dow brine pond complex (Figure 1). The main pond
will be referred to as the “Dow pond” in this chapter.

MSU pond - A storm retention pond, called the “MSU pond,” was constructed on

the campus of Michigan State University (MSU) to treat runoff from a newly constructed

81

parking lot. The parking lot was constructed across Farm Lane road from the MSU
Pavilion south of the Turf Grass Research Facility south of Mt. Hope Road. Runoff from
the newly constructed parking lot was routed via a grassy swale into the pond, which was
constructed east of the parking lot. In addition, an agricultural tile was intercepted and
water from it was routed through the swale and pond to insure that the pond had
sufficient water in it to support wetland vegetation. Since the edges of this newly
constructed pond consisted of bare sediment, I was able to use the MSU pond as a non-
saline reference for the transplanting of three of the emergents planted at the Dow pond
(Figure 2). The purpose of this reference was to demonstrate whether these species could
successfully be transplanted from the source populations into a fieshwater environment
following the same time schedule and procedures used for transplanting these species into
the Dow pond. I elected not to transplant the fourth species, Phragmites australis, into
this pond given its invasive nature and the desire of project planners to have a more
diverse population of native plant species around the MSU pond.

Prior to the transplanting experiment, the MSU pond had a heavy bloom of green
algae and some small patches of sedges and smartweed growing around the pond edges.
Twenty feet or more of bare soil surrounded the pond. Later, grass seed and fertilizer
were spread on the bare soil; however, very little grass had grown by the end of the first
season.

Selection of Salt Tolerant Plants - A literature search revealed salt tolerant wetland
plants that grow in Michigan (App. A). In addition, surveys of a natural salt seep
community growing along the Maple River in Clinton County, Michigan (see Chapter 2),

and the existing plant community at the Dow pond were used to select four species of

82

emergent wetland plants to test in the transplant experiment at the Dow pond. The
emergent plants were chosen based on four main criteria: 1) high salt tolerance, 2)
availability of source populations, 3) native to Michigan, and 4) usefulness of plant
structure to provide wildlife food and habitat.

Growth Studies - Two growth experiments were conducted in the Dow main pond using
plots cormtructed of topsoil and potted emergent plants placed in shallow water (Figure
1). The four plant species chosen for the emergent plant experiments were S. pungens
(three-square bulrush), S. mnericmms(01ney's bulrush), T who migus'tr'folia (narrow
leaved cattail), and Phragmites mastralis (common reed). All of these except S.
mnen’cmms were already growing in or near the water at the Dow pond.

Plugs of S. pungens and T. angustrfolia were obtained from wetlands along
Saginaw Bay. S. americanus plugs were obtained from a natural salt seep on the Maple
River in Clinton County, Michigan. P. australis plugs were transplanted fiom one of
several dense stands growing around the perimeter of the Dow pond.

Transplanting the plugs of the four emergent species at the Dow pond did not
occur until mid-summer (June 26, 2001 for 71 wrgustr'folia, S prmgens, and P. australis,
and June 27, 2001 for S. amerr'camrs). Transplanting stems that late in the season
(beyond mid-summer) can prevent successful transplanting (Hammer 1992). To
determine whether transplanting could be successfully done this late in the season, plugs
of the two bulrushes (June 18 for S. americanus, and June 26 for S. pungens) and II
wrgustrfolia (June 21, 2001) were transplanted to plots set up at the MSU pond (Figure
2). The two species of bulrush came fiorn the same source populations as the plants at

the Dow pond; however, the T. mrgustIfoIia came from a marsh on the MSU campus.

83

The common reed was not transplanted into the MSU pond, since it is a highly invasive
species that spreads easily and is difficult to control (Sculthorpe 1985, Hammer 1992).

At the Dow pond, each of the emergent species was transplanted into three
replicated experimental plots constructed on shallow areas of the main pond that were
exposed during low water conditions (Figures 1, 3 and 4). Topsoil was obtained locally
and hauled to the site by Dow contractors. Six inches (15 cm) of topsoil were spread out
along the shore in two areas that were expected to be inundated by rising water as the
pond was filled during the summer. The nine plots were constructed in a 3 x 27 yd area
away from the dense stands of common reed that grew along the shore (Figure 2). Each
of the nine plots (three plots allocated to 71 ngusu’folia, three allocated to S. mnericwms,
and three allocated to S. pungens) measured 3 x 3 yd. The treatments (species
transplanted) were randomly assigned to each of the nine plots. The three plots for the P.
australr's were constructed in a 3 x 9 yd area with the same plot dimensions used for the
other three species (9 ydz, 6 inches topsoil depth) but were placed adjacent to an existing
reed stand (Figure 1). Each plot contained 15 plugs for a total of 45 plugs for each.
species. These plugs contained one or more rhizomes and stems of the species being
transplanted.

The individual plots at the MSU pond were similarly designed to those at the Dow
pond (Figure 2 and 3). However, each species was not randomly assigned to plots, but
grouped in one area with an empty plot between each planted plot (Figure 2). Since the
pond was already covered with topsoil, the plots could be more widely spaced. The
plugs were planted at the edge of the pond under the water, and were covered by about 5

cm of water for most of the summer.

Based on my understanding of water depths in the Dow pond in previous
summers, I assumed that the plots would be inundated within a few weeks of
transplanting the plant plugs. However, flooding of the plots did not occur during the
2001 growing season. Since the plots at the Dow pond were not in the pond water, the
plots were watered starting July 16 with fresh water at the rate of 0.25-0.5 inches of
water/day, 5 days/wk so that the transplants could become established before being
exposed to brine from the pond. Then starting in mid-August, the plants were watered 5
days/wk with 0.25-0.5 inches of saline water pumped from the Dow Pond until
November 1, 2001.

The numbers of surviving and new stems, based on being green in color and/or
having new shoots or leaves, were recorded for each plug. Maximum stem lengths were
measured periodically from time of transplanting until October 10 at the Dow pond. The
number of live plugs was based on the presence of live stems. Stem heights were
measured only if they were whole, upright stems (not bent or cut). The stem lengths were
not measured on the day they were transplanted, but were measured up to one week later.

The number of surviving stems and stem lengths were also recorded periodically
at the MSU pond until August 8. Counting of stems was stopped at the MSU pond
because the stems became so numerous and spread out that they were difficult to count
and made the individual plugs indistinguishable. Toward the end of the summer, a
random sample of over 50 plant heights for all three species was taken at the MSU pond
to compare to the Dow pond populations. Random samples were taken by tossing a stick

into the plot and measuring heights of the nearest three stems. Also, measurements of

85

stem height fiom the S. (men'cams population at the salt seep on the Maple River were
randomly sampled to compare to the MSU and Dow pond populations.

Pot experiment - Since pond water depth never increased enough to inundate the plots
during the summer, a second experiment was initiated in late July with three of the
emergent plants (excluding P. australis). Six pots per species with one plant plug per pot
wereplaced intheedge ofthe mainpond sothatthebaseoftheplant was inundatedbut
the stem extended above the water line. An additional six pots were placed in a wetland
pond on the MSU campus as a control. The condition of the transplanted stems (live and
growing, dead, senescent) or growth of new stems in each pot was recorded periodically
until October 10, 2001.

Statistical analyses - Statistical analyses on species specific data were performed using
Systat 8.0. Paired Student’s t-tests were used to determine differences between number
of live stems per plug and stem lengths per plug for all plots combined on each sampling
day within the same population (Dow or MSU). Differences between the Dow and MSU
pond populations for the average number of live stems per plug and average stem lengths
per plug were determined using a two-group independent t-test. Differences among the
three plots within the same population on the same sampling date were determined using
ANOVA Finally, the difi‘erent stern lengths between S. americanus populations (Dow,
MSU, and Maple River salt seep) were detemrined using a two-group independent t-test.
Significant differences were determined at p<0.05.

Baum:
Water Chemistry - The results of the water chemistry are shown in Table 1. The MSU

pond had higher dissolved oxygen and % saturation than the Dow pond, although both

were supersaturated. Conductivities were the highest at the Dow pond, followed by the
Maple River salt seep, from where the S. wnericarms plant plugs were taken. The MSU
pond had the lowest conductivity of all three areas. The Dow pond had very low
alkalinity indicating low buffering capacity, but the MSU pond and Maple River seep
were comparable. The pH and chloride ion concentration was also highest in the Dow
pond, whereas the other two sites were lower. Nitrate concentrations were much higher
attheMSUpond, thanattheothersites, butammoniumwas higherattheDowpond.
Several ion concentrations were not measured at the MSU pond; however, the Dow pond
had much higher ion concentrations than the Maple River salt seep (Table 1).

Plot experiment - The results of the plot growth experiments are presented in Figures 5-
19 and Tables 2—4. The results for T. angusnfolia are shown in Figure 5-6. At the Dow
pond, this species did send up new shoots while the plots were being watered with
fieshwater (57% increase), even though 8 of the 45 plugs appeared dead (Table 2).
However, the total number of stems declined after the plots were watered with saline
water from the main pond and an additional 6 plugs appeared dead (see Table 2, Figure
5). Average maximum stem length decreased while being watered with fresh water but
increased after being watered with pond water (Figure 5).

T who angustifolia at the MSU pond significantly increased the total number of
living stems by 284% over the summer and only one plug appeared dead (Figure 5, Table
2). Stem lengths decreased over the summer (Figure 6). In comparing the two
populations on similar sampling dates, the population at MSU had higher average

numbers of living stems initially and at the end of the summer. Initial stern lengths were

87

significantly longer at the MSU pond. Stem lengths were significantly shorter at the Dow
pond both after fi’esh watering and salt watering (Table 3 and 4).

Results for S. americanus are shown in Figures 7-9. Live stems at the Dow pond
increased 16% over the entire summer, even though the number of live plugs decreased
by 7 (Table 2). The total number of live stems continued to increase although live plugs
decreased by 3 even after the first sampling with pond salt water. Only in the final
sampling did total number of live stems decrease and two more plugs appeared dead
giving a total of 38 live plugs at the end of the summer (Table 2, Figure 7). Stem lengths
also increased over most of the summer after an initial decrease. (Figure 8).

At the MSU pond, S amerr'camrs live stems and stem lengths increased over the
summer (Figures 7 and 8). This species had the highest growth rate of all the species
with an increase of 1444% in total number of live stems over the summer and only one
plug appeared dead (Table 2). Initially, the average number of live stems and stem
heights were similar for the populations at both ponds (Table 3). Later in the summer,
the MSU pond had significantly more live stems and taller stem lengths than at the Dow
pond both before and after watering with salt water (Table 4). Comparing the stem
lengths to the source population by the Maple River, the MSU pond had similar stem
lengths, but the Dow pond had significantly shorter stem lengths both before and after
salt watering. Stern lengths were significantly longer at the Dow pond after watering with
salt water than before salt watering. (Figure 9).

S pungens responded poorly to transplanting at the Dow pond plots. The total
number of live stems decreased after the first two samplings, but remained stable the rest

of the summer, until it decreased again in the final sampling (Figure 10, Table 2). The

number of live plugs decreased greatly with this species, from an initial transplanting of
45 plugs to 7 plugs by the end of the summer (Table 2). Stem lengths decreased
significantly alter the first sampling; but began to lengthen after being watered with pond
water (Figure l 1).

The number of stems increased by 477% over the summer for S. pungens at the
MSU pond (Figure 10, Table 4). Average stem lengths maintained the same length
except for a small dip in the third sampling (Figure 11). The number of live plugs
decreased by four (to 41 live plugs) over the summer (Table 2). The initial average
number of live stems was higher at the MSU pond than at the Dow pond, but stem
lengths were similar when comparing both populations (Table 3). The number of live
stems and the stem lengths were much greater at the MSU pond than at the Dow pond
later in the summer (Table 4).

Despite being well established in many stands around the Dow pond complex, P.
australis responded poorly to transplanting. The total number of live stems decreased
greatly after transplanting and decreased by 85% over the summer (Figure 12). The
number of live plugs also had a large decrease of 41, only 4 live plugs remained at the
end of the summer (Table 2). The average number of live stems decreased even more
after being watered with saline pond water (Table 2, Figure 12). The average stem
lengths were not significantly different throughout the summer (Figure 13).

The average number of live stems per plug in each of the three plots per plant
species were not significantly different for most sampling dates. However differences
were seen on a few sampling dates for T. angustrfolia at both the Dow and MSU ponds

(Fig. 14 and 15, respectively), for S. amen'cmms at the Dow pond (Fig. 16), and for S

89

pungens at the MSU pond (Fig. 17). The only significant differences in average stem
lengths per plug for the three plots per plant species was seen in the T. wrgustrfolia plots
at the Dow pond (Fig. 18) and in S wnericanus at the MSU pond (Fig. 19).

Pot experiment - Because of problems with the transplanting experiment (i.e., pond
water not reaching the plots at the Dow pond), a pot growth experiment was set up. This
experiment was conducted very late in the growing season (late July). After the first
weeks at the Dow pond, above ground stems of all three species appeared dead.
However, a week later S. amen'carms had a new shoot appear. After four weeks, S.
americanus had two new shoots per pct (12 shoots total) and TI angustzfolia had one new
shoot for all six pots. S pungens had no shoots and appeared to be dead.

Six pots of all three species were also set up at the MSU pond to see if the
transplants would grow so late in the summer. However, animals ate the rhizomes on all
the S. pungens and on three of the T. angustrfolia. The pot experiment was run with the
remaining three I angusnfolia and six S. americanus pots. Nearly all the original stems
appeared dead, but T. angustr‘folia had one new shoot per pot (three total) and S.
americanus had an average of four new shoots per pct (24 total).

D' .

Plot experiments - The plants at the Dow pond grew worse overall than the plants
transplanted to the MSU pond in every experiment. The MSU pond is much fiesher than
the main pond at Dow (see Table 1). T. angustifolia and S. americams were transplanted
5 days and 9 days earlier, respectively, at the MSU pond than at the Dow pond. Although
this may have had some impact on establishment and growth, other factors likely

contributed as well to their lower growth such as water levels, salinity and grazing. At

the MSU pond, a few centimeters of water covered the plots for nearly the entire summer,
whereas water never reached the Dow pond plots without manually watering by a hose.

All the species at the Dow pond and T. wrgustzfolia and S. amen'canus at the
MSU pond showed none or very few reproductive seed heads. However, S. pungens
produced many seed heads in the MSU pond. T angustr‘folia and P. ausr‘ralis were
already starting to flower at the time of transplanting. Due to transplanting shoclg above
ground shoots often die and new grth fiom shoots occurs, (Hammer 1992) thus the
transplants may have put more effort into establishing themselves and vegetatively
growing instead of sexually reproducing.

The plants at the MSU pond were successful at establishing and greatly
proliferated. Although they continued to grow after the early August sampling, they
became so numerous it was difficult to count. At the Dow pond, however, few new
shoots were added after watering with salt water, but stern length did increase. S.
americanus continued growing the first sampling after watering with pond water because
the number of live stems increased, but the number of stems decreased in the final
sampling at the Dow pond. For both S. prmgens and T. mtgustr‘folia, the number of live
stems decreased after watering with salt water.

The average maximum stem lengths were significantly taller at the MSU pond
than at the Dow pond. In poor environmental conditions, such as at the Dow pond, plants
do not grow as well as was seen in this experiment (Begon et al. 1990). At the Dow
pond, stem lengths continued to increase after being watered with salt water, although in

most cases no new stems were added.

91

The most salt tolerant species was P. australis (Hellings and Gallagher 1992),
which was found growing in several areas around the Dow pond perimeter. This species
had the worst transplanting record of all four species. As with all the species, they were
transplanted late in the season. In temperate regions, the best time to plant is early
spring, although planting can occur up until mid-summer (Hammer 1992). Some species,
such as cattails and bulrush can be planted later than mid-summer (Hammer 1992), but P.
ausnulis does not appear to be as tolerant.

S. pungens has the second highest salinity tolerance (App. I), however this species
had the second worst growth record at the Dow pond. Although this species is reported
to tolerate high salinity, different populations have varying tolerance levels (Ungar 1991).
Therefore, the source population of S. pungens may have not had a high salt tolerance.
This species' low salt tolerance is also seen in the pot experiment, in which all pots of S
prmgens had no new growth, while the other two species produced new shoots. In
addition, this species suffered the greatest amount of grazing at the Dow pond. On
several occasions, the entire stem and rhizome appeared to be removed.

Of all the species, S. amerr'carms grew best at both ponds. S mnericanus had the
second lowest salinity tolerance of all the plants tested (App I). This species may have
been more successful partly because the phigs had more soil than the other species. The
source populations of T. angusnfolia, S pungens and P. australis were all in sandy, loose
soils that fell away from the rhizomes upon extraction of the stems. S. amen'canus
populations however, were in more clay-like organic soil that held together upon
extraction of the plant plugs. Thus, a clump of soil, stems, rhizomes, and possibly seeds

were transplanted, whereas the other species only had the stems and rhizomes being

92

transplanted. In addition, the plugs may have prevented the mghly damaging grazing that
was done to S pungens by making the rhizomes more difficult to remove. Although the
stems were often cut, indicating grazing, the plugs and rhizomes were rarely removed.
Even though species with soil plugs grew better, all three species transplanted were
successfully established at the MSU pond with only the stem and rhizome.

S mnericanus was also successfirl in the pot experiment. This species produced
an averageoftwonewshootsperpotattheDowpondwhenitwassaturatedwith salt
water. Although it only grew half as well as pots at the MSU pond (producing an average
of 4 new stems per pot), it still was able to grow successfully. Thus, this species would
be a good candidate to plant at the Dow pond.

The least salt tolerant species was T. angustifolia, however, it was the second best
grower in the transplant experiment. The highest salt tolerance reported for this species
is near 20 ppt (McMillan 1959), which is near the highest salinity reported for the 2001
summer at the Dow pond. T. angustrfolia was abundant on the edges of an adjacent
pond, thus as the Dow pond becomes fresher, this species will likely become more
abundant at the pond since it is an aggressive invader of open wetlands (Hammer 1992,
Prach and Wade 1992).

Differences between plots within populations on the same sampling dates were
probably mostly affected by wind and grazing. For T. angusrrfolia at the Dow pond, the
middle plot consistently had more live stems and taller stem lengths. The middle plot
may have been partly protected by the wind by the first plot of T. wigustrfolia that was
directly west of the middle plot (Figure 4). The first S mnericams plot at the Dow pond

may have been affected by grazing. This plot was between two S pungens plots, which

93

were the most heavily gazed species in this experiment (Figure 4). In addition, this plot
had one plug that was completely pulled out by gazers, and it was also the only plot for
several samplings that had any dead plugs (2 out of 15).

At the MSU pond, the plot farthest east consistently had fewer stems or shorter
stems lengths for all three species. This would also indicate that wind my have caused
the differences between the plots within this population. Based on the blueprints of the
MSUpond, theeast endofthepond is most exposedwithaless steep slopeofahill and
no trees.

Unfortunately, this transplant study was not continued into a second year since
funding fiom Dow was not renewed. Had the study continued, I would have done
additional studies to determine if the plants that were transplanted in the first year were
well enough established to survive the winter. Tracking the stem counts and stem heights
would have been continued into the second year to determine over-winter survival rates.

Furthermore, growth studies of these four species should be conducted in the N-S
and E-W ponds, which have fresher water. Part of the project goals for the Dow pond
was to decrease the salinity of the pond water. Conducting these growth studies in the N-
S and E-W ponds could indicate the desired salinity level for the main pond at which
successful of transplanting and revegetating of the main pond could occur. Other
variations of this transplant study would be to find additional plant species (see App. A)
that may tolerate this salinity and conduct similar gowth experiments.

An additional study would be to push topsoil into the pond, especially near areas
where P. austmlis patches were well established. This plant was growing along the

edges, mainly where soil had been pushed into the pond, but it did not appear to be

94

growing on the pond sediments. Although in some areas, P. ausn-aIis had sent horizontal
shoots into the pond water, suggesting this species is tolerant of the saline pond water. If
P. australis expanded to the topsoil, it would help determine if P. australr's is prohibited
fiom gowing in the pond because of the sediments or due to the some other factor.
Additionally, the chemistry and engineering groups working on this project suggested
that a topsoil cap be placed over the gel-like pond sediments to decrease the diffusion of
salt into the pond water in order to freshen the We: This experiment of capping the
sediments would be beneficial to both reduce the salt content of the pond water and to

help establish plant growth.

95

Works cited

Begon, M., J. L. Harper, C. R. Townsend. 1990. Ecology: Individuals, Populations and
Communities. 2‘“1 ed. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Boston.

Broome, S. W., 1. A. Mendelssohn and K. L. McKee. 1995. Relative growth of Spartina
parens (Ait.) Muhl. and Scimus olneyi gray occurring in a mixed stand as affected
by salinity and flooding depth. Wetlands 15: 20-30.

Catling, P. M. and S. M. McKay. 1981. A review of the occurrence of halophytes in the
eastern Great Lakes Region. Michigan Botanist. 20: 167-179.

Ewing, K. J. C. Earle, B. Piccinin, and K. A. Kerwhaw. 1989. Vegetation patterns in
James Bay coastal marshes. II. Physiological adaptation to salt-induced water
stress in three halophytic gaminoids. Can. J. Bot. 67: 521-528.

Hammer, D. A 1992. Creating Freshwater Wetlands. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton.

Hellings, S. E. and J. L. Gallagher. 1992. The effects of salinity and flooding on
Phragmites australis. Journal of Applied Ecology. 29: 41 -49.

McMillan, C. 1959. Salt tolerance within a Twha population. Am. J. Bot. 46: 521-526.

Prach, K. and P. M. Wade. 1992. Populations characteristics of expansive perennial
herbs. Preslia, Praha. 64: 45-51.

Queen, W. H. 1974. Physiology of costal halophytes. In Ecology of Halophytes. Ed R. J.
Reimbold and W. H. Queen. Academic Press, New York.

Sculthrope, C. D. 1967. The Biology of Aquatic Vascular Plants. Edward Arnold,
London.

Ungar, I. W. 1974. Inland halophytes of the United States. In Ecology of Halophytes. Ed
R. J. Reimbold and W. H. Queen. Academic Press, New York.

Ungar, I. W. 1991. Ecophysiology of Vascular Halophytes. CRC Press, Boca Raton.
Waisel, Y. 1972. Biology of Halophytes. Academic Press, New York
Williams, D. D., N. E. Williams, and Y. Cao. 1997. Spatial differences in

macroinvertebrate community structure springs in southeastern Ontario in relation
to their chemical and physical environments. Can. J. Zool. 75: 1404-1414.

Table 1. Water chemistry data from the Dow pond, MSU pond, and the Maple River salt
seep, the source of the S wnericanus population. “n.d.” indicates non-detectible, an “—
“ indicates parameters not sampled.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Parameter Dow pond MSU pond Maple River
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 7.8-8.7 10.7-14.8 -

% oxygen saturation 92.9-103% 120%-165% -
Conductivity (uS) 24,000-38,500 720-747 531-3471
Alkalinity (mg CaC03/L) 67-75 180-194 159-361
PH 8 7.76-7.85 6.98-7.89
N03 —N (mg NIL) 0.13-0.24 12 n.d-7.95
NH4 ~—N (mg N/L) 0.69-0.77 0.0001 1-0.00015 n.d.-.27
Potassium (K, mg/L) 414-441 - n.d-l3.5
Calcium (Ca, mg/L) 5400-5795 - 67-1110
Ortho-Phosphorus (mg/L) n.d. 3.9x10"-4.2x10“ 0.01-0.08
Manganese (Mn, mg/L) 0.2 - 0.02-0.9
Sodium (Na, mg/L) 1728-1874 - 11-666
Chloride (Cl, mg/L) 12,315-14,065 29 68-1800

 

Table 2. Total number of live stems for all 45 plugs at the initial and final sampling for
both the Dow and MSU ponds. Also shown is the total number of live stems before
watering with salt water at the Dow pond. The number in parenthesis indicates the
number of live plugs, indicated by the presence of living stems.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dow MSU
Species Initial Before salt Final Initial Final
P. australis 124 (45) 29 (7) l8 (4) - -
T. angustr'folia 58 (45) 91 (37) 57 (31) 79 (45) 303 (44)
S americanus 307 (45) 413 Q13) 356 (38) 314 (45) 4849 (44)
Springer”: 119 (45) 47 (18) 28 (7) 162 (45) 934 (41)

 

Table 3. Initial average stern number per plug and stem lengths per plug with standard
deviation at the Dow and MSU ponds with the t and p values. A " indicates a significant

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

difference between populations .05).

Species Dow MSU t p

71 angustrfolia # stems 1.29 :tO.458 1.76 10933 2.96 0005*
Stem lengths 136 i203 173 i303 6.48 >0.001*

S. americcmus # stems 6.82 13.68 6.98 i272 0.25 0.807
Stem lengths 45.8 i242 55.8 $16.14 2.08 0046*

S pungens # stems 2.64 i103 3.60 i159 3.54 0001*
Stem lengths 60.3 i187 61.9 21:18.9 0.71 0.483

 

 

 

 

 

 

97

 

 

 

Table 4. The average number of stems per plug and stems lengths per plug with standard
deviations comparing the Dow and MSU plant populations before (Aug 14) and after

(Oct 10) watering with salty pond water at the Dow pond plots with the t and p statistics.
All number of stems and stem lengths were significantly different in the two populations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(p=0.05).
Species Dow MSU t, p
Dates Aug 14 Oct 10 Aug 8 Aug 14 Oct 10
T. # stems 2.02 i1.45 1.27 11.07 6.73 2122.93 10.4, 11.5,
angustifolia >0.001 >0.001
Stem 42.2 i372 63.7 i182 173 i303 15.6, 9.49,
lengths >0.001 >0.001
S # stems 9.17 11:5.83 7.91 i626 108 i387 17.5, 17.4,
americanus >0.001 >0.001
Stem 17.4 21:10.6 29.7 :1:15.8 87.1 19.54 31.1, 20.9,
lengths >0.001 >0.001
S pungens # stems 1.04 21:1.86 0.622 20.8 i168 7.88, 7.82.
i165 >0.001 >0.001
Stem 11.3 i808 34.0 $18.3 64.8 i237 3.31, 0.94,
lengths 0.016 0.014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

98

 

Tittabaw ssee River

Pump
Stati 1 I

 
  
 
 
   
 
  
 

 

 

  

Pond
Main Pond
' l‘ Test plot No. 1
' 3 plots, 3x9 yd\s‘. .
Test Plot No. 3 Test Plot No. 2 I I
3x6 pcts\ 9 plots, 3x27 yds. .

 

 
 

OvEr'iBok Pak " '
Figure 1. Experimental plot locations at the brine pond complex showing the four
interconnected ponds with the inlet source (*), outlet pump (x), and direction of water
flow indicated by the thick black arrows (9) From the pump station pond outlet (x),
the water is pumped into the Tittabawassee River. The Raw Brine Pond is not connected
to the brine pond complex and was not examined in this study. The dark gray boxes

show the locations of the experimental growth plots (test plots no. 1 and 2) and pot
experiment (test plot no. 3).

‘. -—
——o - ,__—____,_, -

99

‘N . T. angustifolia

 

 

 

«5‘

 

 

 

 

31
11

Figure 2. The MSU pond with location of plots and species planted. Grey plots indicate
plots that were planted and white plots indicate empty or unplanted plots.

1
1
t
a
.1

 

I
r

1
1

100

 

 

 

 

i

C

‘

C
(DQKOO

 

 

4

Figure 3. The individual plot design for the Dow and MSU ponds showing the locations
of each of the 15 plant plugs (black dots) and the spacing (in yards) between each plug.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Plot 1
mill:-

 

Plot 2
Twin

 

Plot 3
S. pun

 

Plot 4
S. am

 

Plot 5
S. pun

 

Plot 6
Typha

 

Plot 7
S. am

 

Plot 8
S. pun

 

Plot 9
S. am

 

 

Figure 4. Plot layout showing the random placement of the T W angusnfolia (Twin),
Schoenoplectus pungens (S. pun), and S americanus (S am) at the Dow pond. Plot 1 is
facing west and plot 9 is facing east.

10]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'
g 290 j 7
1 /

:6 190 2 . +MSU
. 3 / Salt watenng
.3 140 - Fresh water / ' ' D ' 'DO‘”
E .
3 3 watering
.3 90 j / ,. . ........ a
O D. D . . . . ' . . . ..... D
'- 40 1 v v v ' Dr D? r T I r I v T I T T ' fig 1

13-Jun 13-Ju1 12-Aug 11-Sep 11-OCI

Sampling dates

 

 

 

Figure 5. Total number of living stems per sampling date for Twin angustifolia at the
MSU and Dow ponds. Arrows indicate where watering occurred with fresh water and
salt water at the Dow pond.

 

 

 

 

 

 

m
2 200 Freshwater
£180 watering
g 160
3140
-= C
as . 3......
g 80 3° \ Sat -{J- Dow
13' 60
8» 40
E 20
2 o

13-Jtn 13-Ju 12-Aug 11Sep 11-Oct

Sanpllngdae

 

 

 

Figure 6. Average stem lengths per plug for the whole population of T. wrgustifolia at the
MSU and Dow ponds. Different capital letters of indicate significant differences in stem
lengths between sampling dates at the MSU pond and different lower case letters indicate
significant differences in stem length between sampling dates at the Dow pond. Arrows
indicate where watering occurred with fresh water and salt water at the Dow pond

102

 

 

10000

1 L411)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i
n
0
z
'6 +MSU
.. 1000
3 j - - a - -DOW
S
5 DD ...... n ......... D. ' - fl
8 ‘1 Do
a .
"' 4 , Fresh water Salt watering
watering
100 .....................
8-Jun 8-Jul 7-Au9 6-Sep 6-Oct

Sampling dates

 

 

 

Figure 7. Total number of live stems per sampling date for Schoenoplectus americanus at
the MSU and Dow ponds. Arrows indicate where watering occurred with fresh water and
salt water at the Dow pond. Note: the y-axis is in log scale so differences in the number
of stems in the Dow population can be seen more clearly.

 

1 00
90
80
70
60
50
40
3O
20
1 0

0

18-Jun 18-Jul 17-Aug 16-Sep 16-Oct
Sampling date

 

+MSU
— 0- Dow

 

 

 

 

Average stem height(cm)lplug

 

 

 

Figure 8. Average stem lengths per plug for the whole population of S. americanus at the
MSU and Dow ponds. Different capital letters indicate significant differences in stem
lengths between sampling dates at the MSU pond and different lower case letters indicate
significant differences in stem length between sampling dates at the Dow pond. Arrows
indicate where watering occurred with fresh water and salt water at the Dow pond.

103

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

200 r I r r
’E‘ A
8 1.
in 150— “
5 I
on
C
2
E 1OOL— ’ —
8
m
" 7 C
m
a: B _
a; 50r- 1 ..
< 12%

O l

 

Saltsee MSU Dow salt
p Dow fresh

Popumfion

Figure 9: Box plot comparing the average stem lengths of S. amerr'canus populations
fi'om the Maple River salt seep (Salt seep), the MSU pond (MSU), the Dow pond before
being watered with salt water (Dow fresh) and after salt water (Dow salt). The different
letters indicate a significant difference between the population’s heights. * indicate
outliers in the stem heights.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

é .
a 5
9 1
E 1
'6 f +MSU
'- a
3 ; , - - a - - Dow
E j .
g D‘D ....... a -Q ......... D” ~ . . 1
. ‘ a i
:3 Fresh water 33" watenng
watering !

 

 

10 1 TI 1 r 1 1 r r r 1 r 1 r r Ifi r r Tfi

18-Jun 1 -Jul 17-Aug 16-Sep 16~Oct
Sampling dates

 

 

 

Figure 10. Total number of live stems per sampling date for Schoenoplectus pungens at
the MSU and Dow ponds. Arrows indicate where watering occurred with fi'esh water and
salt water at the Dow pond. Note: the y-axis is in log scale so differences in the number
of stems in the Dow population can be seen more clearly.

104

 

 

m
C

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a
g 70 ABC C

E 60 g B A

if 50 \

55° 40 \\ Fresh water 3 +543”
'2 E watering , If ‘ - .fi - a - Dow
8 30 b3! 1" aBEcT

' 20 - ’

o

g 10 a~‘~~fl’j(3alt watering

g be

<

J a a a a a L a a A A A x a A a a a a a A L aaaaa

 

O

28-Jun 18-Ju1 7-Aug 27-Aug 16-Sep 6-Oct
Sampling date

 

 

 

Figure 11. Average stem lengths per plug for the whole population of S. pungens at the
MSU and Dow ponds. Different capital letters indicate significant differences in stem
lengths between sampling dates at the MSU pond and different lower case letters indicate
significant differences in stem length between sampling dates at the Dow pond. Arrows
indicate where watering occurred with fresh water and salt water at the Dow pond.

 

d
.5
O

 

A
N
0
«Cl

 

§

14.11 1111

 

on
O

 

Fresh water
waltering S?“ watering

“in ------------- n P

 

O)
O
J_LIL 1111

 

.5
0

IL}

0.
.
.......
.-A

 

Total number of stems

N
0

"~43 -------- U

0
o

 

 

 

O rrrI—aIrrrry‘filrrrrrTfirrrfrrTrr

18-Jun 8-Jul 28—Jul 17-Aug 6-Sep 26-Sep 16-Oct
Sampling date

 

 

 

Figure 12. Total number of live stems per sampling date for Phragmites australis at the
Dow pond. Arrows indicate where watering occurred with fresh water and salt water at
the Dow pond.

105

 

O)
O

 

 

A 01
o o
’l’
1+4
i I ’

 

 

 

(a)
o
r
4
1
1

N

o
H
1

 

 

_a
O

 

Salt watering
0 r 4 L l } r 1 I r 1 I r r r i r r l r [L r r r r 117 r

28-Jun 18-Jul 07-Aug 27-Aug 16-Sep 06-Oct
Sampling dates

 

 

Average stem length(cm)lplug

 

 

 

 

Figure 13. Average stern lengths per plug for the whole population of P. australis at the
Dow pond. No differences were seen in the average lengths per sampling date. Arrows
indicate where watering occurred with fresh water and salt water at the Dow pond.

 

 

9

8
3 7 I21-Jun
g 6 1:122-Jun
a. 5 DZ-Jul
g 4 I9-Ju1
3 3 1323-Ju1
=2 2 Qéfl

1

o

1 2 3
Plot

 

 

 

Figure 14. Average number of live plant stems per plug per plot for T. angustifolia at the
MSU pond. Significant differences in number of stems per sampling are indicated by
different letters above the bars.

106

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.5 — b
a i
g 2-5 l26-Jun
3 2 03-Ju1
3. C1 12-Jul
5 1-5 I18-Jul
:- 1 — 1:1 14-Aug
0 5 _ Kl 22-Sep
' 12110-Oct
o _
1 2 3
Plot

 

 

 

Figure 15. Average number of live plant stems per plug per plot for T. angustifolia for
the Dow pond. Significant differences in number of stems per sampling are indicated by
different letters above the bars. Solid bars indicate watering with fresh water and striped
bars indicate watering with saline pond water.

 

 

 

 

 

g’ l 3-Ju1
% 12-Jul
S

g a 18—Jul
fi 14-Aug
5’ c1 22-Sep
O

3: a 10-Oct

 

1 2 3
Dow plots

 

 

 

Figure 16. Average stem lengths per plug per plot of T. angustifolia for the Dow pond.
Significant differences in number of stems per plot per sampling are indicated by
different letters above the bars. Solid bars indicate watering with fresh water and striped
bars indicate watering with saline pond water.

107

 

120 -

 

 

 

 

 

U

3

E

3 l 22-Jun
2’

2 [:1 2-Ju1
E [:1 9-Jul
a I 24-Jul
2 D 11-Aug
O

>

<

 

 

MSU plots

 

 

 

Figure 17. Average stem lengths per plug per plot for S americanus at the MSU pond.
Significant differences in number of stems per plot per sampling are indicated by
different letters above the bars.

 

    
  
   
  
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

12 - -— T J I 27-Jun

7'9: 10 %T b 1 T [:1 03—Jul

a; \ % m 12-Ju1

9- \ ‘ \/ l 18-Jul
g $ ’_ E? 1:114-Aug
‘2' § . §¢ [S 22-Sep
N '2 §¢ [210-001

1 I 2 3
Plot

 

 

Figure 18. Average number of live plant stems per plug per plot for S. americanus for
the Dow pond. Significant differences in number of stems per sampling are indicated by
different letters above the bars. Solid bars indicate watering with fresh water and striped
bars indicate watering with saline pond water.

108

 

# plants per plug

 

 

 

l 26-Jun
E: 2-Ju1
13 9-Jul
l 24-Jul
1:1 8-Aug

 

 

 

2 3
Plot

 

Figure 19. Average stem lengths per plug per plot for S. pungens at the MSU pond.

Significant differences in number of stems per plot per sampling are indicated by

different letters above the bars.

109

 

Chapter 5: Conclgsions

Salt has played a major role in human physiology and history. It has been used
for preserving food, has influenced economics and history, and has affected the
environment through natural and anthropogenic processes (Chapter 1). In the
environment, many naturally saline environments have been impacted or destroyed by
human influences, whereas new saline habitats have been created by human activities.
These new saline areas are often a problem because they replace natural fieshwater
habitats (i.e. from road salting or sewage), prohibit the intended use of the land (i.e.
agiculture and irrigation in arid regions), or are waste products that pose problems for
disposal (i.e. from chemical processes in industry).

In this thesis, I examined the effects of salts on the plant assemblage of a rare
natural salt seep wetland in Michigan (Chapter 2). These seeps result from salt deposit
from Paleozoic seas that covered Michigan, but few salt seeps remain. Due to their
unique environment, they contain rare and endangered halophytic species, Olney's three-
square bulrush (Schoenoplectus mnericanus) and the spike rush, (Eleochrm's parvula),
which should be preserved and protected. The abundance of these rare species is
correlated with high conductivity and low levels of soluble reactive phosphorus.

The second area I examined was the effects of salt on the biota of an unusually
saline pond (for the state of Michigan) that was created to contain spent brine at the Dow
plant in Midland, Michigan (Chapter 3). The Dow pond had four ponds that were
sequentially connected along a salinity gradient from the input area in the N-W pond to
intermediate levels of salinity in the E-W pond to the highest levels of salinity in the main

and outlet ponds with salinity varying from less than one fourth the salinity of sea water

110

in the N-W pond to two-thirds the salinity of seawater in the main/outlet pond. However,
the ion concentrations were different from seawater with less magnesium than seawater
with ionic concentrations in decreasing order dominated by chloride, calcium, sodium,
and potassium. The diversity of algae, plants, and invertebrates was low in the pond.
However, algae, plant and invertebrate diversity decreased along the salinity gradient
with highest diversity in the fieshest pond and lowest diversity in the pond with highest
salinity. Much of this increase in diversity appeared to be correlated with invasion of the
fresher N-S and E-W ponds by Chara, a macroalga, which provides food and cover for
invertebrates, waterfowl and other wildlife. Ifdilution of the ponds continues as a
consequence of the fieshening of brine well inputs as these wells are remediated,

establishment of a more complex and diverse food web may follow.

Finally, I conducted experiments on the effects of saline water from the Dow
Main Pond on transplant survivorship and growth of four wetland plants (Chapter 4) (S.
amerr’canus, S. pungens, Twin angustrfolia, and Phragmites australis). These four
emergent plants were transplanted into growth plots at the Dow pond in mid June. Since
transplanting occurred later in the season than was ideal, a transplant experiment
(excluding P. australis) was set up at a nearly fresh water storm retention pond on the
campus of Michigan State University as a reference in order to document that these
species could be successfully transplanted at such a late date in the season. Only S.
americcmus (Olney's three-square bulrush) increased in number of live stems (by 16%)
and showed potential for establishment and gth when irrigated or transplanted into
Dow brine pond water. All other species decreased in number of live stems from the

initial planting when irrigated or transplanted into brine pond water. In contrast,

111

survivorship and growth was high in the flesh water storm water retention pond at MSU.
No species grew as well at the Dow pond as at the MSU pond. All species grew well and
more than tripled their original number of live stems at the MSU pond. Problems at the
Dow pond included the fact that the plots were not inundated late in the season as I had
expected them to be and problems with geese eating the transplanted plants. The fact that
S. wnericanus(01ney's three square bulrush) was able to add some shoots under such
harsh conditions, suggests that this species may have some promise for establishment if
sediments can brought in to cover the margins of the pond and establishment experiments
can be conducted so that the plots are inundated soon after transplanting. Experiments to
confirm this and that P. ausrralis can be encouraged to colonize such areas by sending
rhizomes from existing stands should be the next line of investigation. P. australis is
successfully colonizing areas where soil existed or was pushed into the wetlands
suggesting that it is also a viable species for providing cover around the edges of the
ponds. However, establishment of S. americanus, a less invasive species, would be a

preferred option if further experiments confirm that it will grow in the pond.

112

APPENDICES

113

APPENDIX A

SALT TOLERANT WETLAND PLANTS OF MICHIGAN

114

a: :55 SN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a: E a 22 4. A8 an; em 52 8332.333 . Seeoefiefise fleesuu

€ 53.8 Geeaeoou
:8 an .6 2 ease? a? as a .v 633%.? 52 56.. 2.5 £393» eeeoegue
3:35 3F 8% as: 35 83228 35%
§V§Ba 0232: 253 62 $2.33 eases Essa

:5 Grade?
388 8:32 053 .5323 .w 33 .eeaafimv A3: unsung genesis...
$3 EBB avenue 25% 6V amnemmw $9 new anneaam 3338. .V

2
€ Ease. .w 8:5 :55 8M3“ 232 as: 3°25 33°85 .w
2
9.: 562.. 0338 8:3 :55 82-8 :2: as: 32.5 £9383 e5.
S be?

:9. sea 3 ease? as, 83 a 3:2:de 52 803:: 98% messes Base?

$305.88
55 A32 038.8095 “59.33.: .v.

83322
5.38 :am A32 833:3 2:5 “stance“. zomcmefiev.

A3 3.53

:8 an .5 z 8388:: 55 83 E 853%.? 52 5353 c285 eeeeaegmsgm 3:ch

a: $85
6 33 .V 33 .onva E: :3 53 as 8m 83%» ”5.2%

2 88
5 5383 as: 3386 2&2 §§Emw
8 Gino; 232 we seem 3:38 38v.
Aflofibmommw 3.8500 35.83... W35 «:82 38:80 252 oaseofim
.033 Eco

e5 05 «a 80552 c8382. 2: 8 8.3.. 8355ch 5 E389: 383.3% .88on :08 .«o 352 05 co 33.6.9 38:8 mo _o>o_
2: 832?: 85%—oh 5.38% 8 Boaeohfi .8 9c 268 8:865 :35 59:22 me mace—q 28.83 8828 gem ”< 530%?

115

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.: 8808 8888 088m 8: 8882.86 383.88 88888
S 62 ..88 82,8 88.88 888885
@888
88.8 62 88-88% SE88 .6
$3988 2% A32 52-89% 883885.08 8.23.0
8.: 8888 8888. 088m $9 28.888888. «83888 886
$8838 62 88-85 88.8888 8886
a s
88882-..
.8888 88 88 88-888 8888 .6
$8888
38.38 083m 9:: 68880 8333 8388820
8 3888
8878 52 8888.82 .8... 886
9.: 8888 8888 288 $8 888 8886 8.82888 88886
E 88:8 a 3
=9. 88 .6 3 8:888 .88 88 8 88883. £2 888 8888.. .6
a s
88883. :8 88m 8.88888 6
8 88.8
8... .8 .6 S 8:888. 88, 38 8 52 088 3.8888 .6
5 .888.N
:3 8.. .6 3 8:888 .83 88 a A288,? 52 .888 8.88.88 8.66
$83.83 8 «808800 388209 83.5 0882 808800 0882 cannomom

 

 

88888 < 888%.

116

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ev 5:35 0288. 8:3 E: $3053 835 a§§m3~§§
E be?
:8 an .6 3 page? a? 83 a 62 Beacon 535% 5.56
E be?
:9. an .5 o; 82:38 firs 8.3 5 A32 :3 §BB0M cfizcénézuk nataxugk
$38?” as
@8385... as 3:8 58 3 E 33885 5 Hz came“ .5 23 m
E53: :8 $9 088.. 9.2m 8% 835
as x885 9:: o§a a; 8§§§ Seam
waogosm 8% Oman 038m sigofiemcssfié
E $5.3 :9. an. .6 3 as, a; a 52 88:8 sagebwm .m
E be? =9. :3 .6 12.583 5 52 83.0.3-8. 55.38% 53.5qu
E a3?
:8 an .6 3 8:82? 55 83 5 52 ©8325 agents “2%qu
E £53
:8 an .6 3 8:85: 5E 83 a 52 Eyes 3252 gash seams
G _ 3&2
9 ,5 52 303333 22% §§m
E538
:3 :3 85 A82 53 ..an s§a§ .m
622 a 88305 62 :3 £3.53 agarfiaam
@335 3F 52 52%? SEE uésm
$535 52 was 2;» :23: §§x§m
E €53.
=8 E .6 3 Ease? .23 33 5 69%de Ez owns 33a 2388.823 5335
Amooaobmomv d 3:25:00 3.8th Euro 252 35:50 252 33:23

 

 

@3388 < 522.?

117

 

 

 

 

 

 

E $5.: 83633
:8 an -6 o._ 8386:: firs 8.3 5 A32 Eustoz 36%.5 makeué
@5365 E: as» 3885 am a§§§x§<§§
3:332
-26 52 68303 62E 3:3
8:32
@5338 0288. 253 A E: B§_-ao__§ names 8503
m 3
EV EBB 0.6332 256 568834 E: :25 558% age“. 33qu
@538
a: E s 85:35 25% 62 as“ $3668 .5
@6533 99 as» 6.86 633% .5
Eggs“. um 62 6.2 62% .s
m 3
EV EBB 93.65h 053m 39:834. $62 5.3 3&3 25.35
E be?
:3 E .6 3 Sea? a? 83 5 52 we 83 8258 83% .N
G: 533
.5 38308
3 3m A32 mm: 033 2;? 836.56: ME
8:62
E a5 a: as» =3 33% s§35§§~
E £53.. Aflvaaeoou
:3 an. .6 3 5:555 5E 83 5 .v @5385 $2 as» 30% 8298 832%
6982
An: S 5 9:68 :5 9:3 3 “5 A32 3238 unBm 3323.2: maumSE
66266.65 a. 3:08:80 356—oh Euro 252 38:80 252 ocucfiom

 

 

63388 < 528.?

118

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ewwaéd E: 83.55 8.2%.: afigstm

E583
.633qu Ez 32» .35 55:6: saga

E $33

:9. E .6 3 ease? as» 83 a 39%de 82 ea 328% 33%.... 948.6

366568
cam—8.6m A32 396:3 8062;36:8sz
36%; an: 962 $-28 32.; 338 SE32
Eggs 32 332 afifiag .2
$633 6 62 3:2 agkaxuz

E more.

35.2-: .o a; -333 3326 338% .3

$386808
-v .3128 um 52 6.38.533 B§§§ §=§§§E

Am 3
$3 388 8332 053 eaaoonYSN E: ”new 533 .336»? 56362;:

SE? 80332

a: E .86 835%» 38889.. :38 6m 62 6:386 88.3. 5.33
E as“ 6,20 80%. 333 33 3°23:

G a
E be? :8 an .6 m: a? 33 s 86883 8sz BE. 25, 6.265 33»:

E 3.53

:8 an .5 o._ 82:38 5m? 86 5 SN: to? >282 5.83653: 338563
$366.65 um 3:68:80 356—oh Ewto 0:62 38:80 252 05338

 

 

€086.08 < 52a?

119

 

 

gauge.“ ..m 3 9 30333 was =Smm°=§©m
E £53..
:8 :5 .6 I 82:38 53 83 5 ca: 053.3 822% 8358a
E3»; 5 E2 Denise ssgms. m
E82...
35 .5 A32 303583033 E35955. .&
QESEB 5 E2 289833 32 ufiefifiofié m
Ev $62.. 83.38 25% E_ v33 35H ~§§S m
QESEB hm Ez 98:5.5H 25358 m
Ease
053m A32 3238M 5:233 Eatcmboa.
EV 5:38 03.38 258 E: :SBEBSM 8m
E E_ 838: fiaaém 3238 9&an
a : eaaoom
.e E “82m
05—895 8N: ems—8E cop—Eco SEE Q
Ev 388 8388 2:3 E: 53:5 3853 sagas
@3538
.352 a 62 ”3.35 .3833 35$
E E33
EEV EB... 02232 25% .6338? E2 82 “3%: ”simuém
Amoocouomomv an £08809 35.8.3. :35 0:82 58:80 252 ofiaaomom

 

 

 

 

 

 

@3588 < 533?.

120

 

 

RS 3 E 238 :5 89m €5.88 gum A32 5260505 QQQSBSQE Eggnofinaé
sings .m 62 “8380 828 §§§ x
a: i £§§§§ .x 3:8 $5.2

:8 an .6 3 5:522. a? 83 a @z @333 983m 3.3% a

G :

aaeoom 7%
a: S 5 ..8285 .33535 .m 52 “.333 ”28% 333% 38g

2:
Q: 388 02,38 25% .6 53.8-2 9:: saw :32 33% usgaam

a :

eaaoomvé
$538 :8 :82 Ragga 82% §§§m
$533 a 52 80328 33ng m

a s 30328
Emacs? @z .32 @336 Eofiépz m
333% 3A aw 982 28m 32 c8”. 333me m
2
E38878 52 825 28 omam 333K m
53:, .m 62 80328 ”.85 Eat a
65:3 km 62 80388 $3 32% m
3032.2.

$5335 $2 852.352 afioék m
Amoocouomoyc a. 3:08:80 cacao—oh :35 0:32 con—Eco 252 outcomom

 

 

 

 

 

 

@3588 < $89?

121

 

 

 

 

 

 

683.86 .853
$5.: 588 0238. 258 6:08? 52 833 85. 30028 .0
50.5883
-8 .8388
08.8.5 3 § anamégzum 638388 .m.
E 82:3 3:50:08
:9. a: .6 3 page? a? 83 5 .0. .6380? 62 52.3 33: £83.: 0
3008005
£808 20m A32 083-803 «08886 w.
60 5:85 03:3
£22 s 380825 3.: 3.6 .658: V 52 8:: @350 3§S§ a
3 £83 a:
:9. a: .6 o: 88.88 £3 83 a .5882-.. 62 83.3 8% Bum 3:8 3888880.
83.0 323.8% .0. 3:8 833
=9. 8: ._0 v.“ 8:888 515 00:: 5 A32 680088 :80? 8.303% 8.880%
8:
830382803: 0: 0:38.: 0>§ZANV 5.028%? as Z 803320 000830 8:80:30
3833.: 62 08:55. 030: .m
G:
:03? .5 3 25 902 0008305 008.88% 8.8500”
a: :z s 88088. G: 8923 62 2:838 030.88 58::
S 883.. :8 a: .6 3 5:3 83 a 52 :80 023 :88 33833 00:3:
a 38882
+ .30 3:38
08.8.5 A32 0600 :0200 §E0§ 8; 0.38388 883%
38:08.65 0 0808800 00:833. :85 0802 88800 0802 08806m

 

 

@2088 < 8.22

122

a:

 

 

$3 53.. 0268. 2:3 62 “an? 9;: 3:93 afifisfis §§w
@3385 ”238. 8:6 A3: 38 Egeomm
3:332.
gum 9:: 32° 3% 33:»: §~§§m
$3.: usage
a 3:6 6533 0:38. 25% E: :59" 8% page w
83.: as 62
$3. .m 8:6 dfifia 02mg. 2:3 5%? E: 35% 23 8:3: 55.3%
$3385 87.38 053 353% 9 a: 62 3&28 SEEK a.
$3 323%.: @aqw.mm-o £328
3288 5.6 Em 82.. ..88an .G .6: Ex? 3:2 3°28. =8 Baumgsmw
3:352
$3 5:38 2582 8:3 05.3-5 9:: 852% 33m QaEfisa $35
€ $53..
=8 :5 .6 3 Ease? 5E 3: 5 69 ”35522 u§§§ 2.53%
G 5.538“
E 3.53 -v
:9. an .6 I 5:82? as, 83 a .33.. 9 3m 62 €23 .335 96a 5%
@338
538 “am 39 mamébéa 58:5? 333323,.
35 £95 a; afie 32? 83» .m
Av: :23: 8:32 83 $9 .38 36 Efixaga.
@5235
.chan an: 62 €53 8» «om ~§gos§=39 a
@8583 Q aoEEoU 3.8.8.05 0232 0:3 Z 58:80 0:32 oEEoMom

 

 

 

 

 

 

88388 < 5.2.?

123

.EN “2 0.5qu 000.0028 .00 0800030. 50232 .5202 20m 3550 08203 0 .00 «SE .22 .m .m ..m .5005 AN
03.21600 .0880 .0 .02 02.308 .0008 8030000
0o 35.. 83 0o 532:5 08 00.53 020003 0o 082.05 2: .82 282882 .0 .0 as .8002 .0 .0 ..m .< 05200 :

 

 

 

 

 

 

as 35 880820803000 .9 6533.0 362 8: 2;» 8.0%? 0.0800
a 3
80882.8
000.203 .0 52 08388 8830 0.53% 000300000
50002 60.8
.6933 52 2? .380 25. 33:05 0:053;
E 005.3
=9. .00 .6 3 8080.0: a? 83 5 62 2:8 050000 8.2% 805
€ 6800... GEE To
:9. an .6 S 8:85: a? 8.0 5 02080.9. 52 00:8 $888 000x03 .0
@000: .008
-o .Gcaqnv 60 3087552 53000000 £5
@538
03.00 @002 330.205. 00320 .0
a 68088?
-80 003038
0.9.00 262 030.382 5055.32 03800.20
3000.53 8:0 083 as? 3&2 5530.0
8 $53
=8 0a .6 3 8:50.? a? 83 s 690%.? 52 Ea 532 0.83% 0:00.02:
A0335 000 62 003-803 8:036» 50600.0
A888000Mv 0% 00008800 00:80.3. 02002 0802 008800 0802 onwcomom

 

 

602588 < 00225..

124

.03 ”00 .030 _8_:000m >003. 05 .00 53:05 0000000900 gmfiog 30:00 .800 .m .0 00.0055 SN

0:0 200885 .353 0.0 03080 0.85520 03088808020500 085 .E 50 .020 50222 .002 .0 .0 08> EN

.200 2008020 .8500 00 330E 0.8.0500 088500-0885800 085 00 5.0 .220 502002 .32 .0 .0 .2812

0:5 2008005 .00030m .00 38:05 0.00.5080 00000002 0:0 0800000085 .0 :00 .0005 0002002 NS— .0 .m 08> a:

.830 080 .32.. 000 3:03:00 533> 00 00222380 .32 .< 0 .005 E

000302 :05 0500000 Ecoeceficm .0805 0035 8000005002 05 00.0 0200 0500070 000303 .82 .< .0 00000005. G0
0.6% 000000 3000000005 >025 Egg—000 .8080.“ 300808300

0050 000 00003 00 5:000 00 0030—00 5 .8915 5002 00.0500 0030.5 .00 00_88m0> N03 .2500M .< .m 000 .m .m .5306 A2
00-8 00 00580 50222

009032 E 000300.00 00 000003000 05 :0 3008800 FEB 0200000 009022 0 000.0 000300—000 .002 .< .< 10000030 A3
020% 302 .05 000.5 0§0000<

000 .0025 .m .3 1000 20020.00 .p. 1 000.3003.“ .00 30.3w 5 00530—0: .00 000: 2800000 330800 05. .32 ._. .m 06:29:

dc E 5.05: . 5 00300080 $000205 003m 00m£22 9% E0202: 0003000 «0.0302 SEEBE 30
00.20 a 00580 5.0222

2.02.30 0.90080 5.080 00 8820 20 30.5 53.0 30280 000222 2:0 0.32 3580 .22 .0 003%: E
.878 n? .0080 0 .50 028% 230022

000.5 02.0 5 000038300 com 000 000803 000% :0 gum—00 000 £800 .00 $00.00 05. .32 00003 .< .0 0:0 2:0 00.0330 80
600.80” mm

03203 08.300808 00030 .8050 00 538m :0 38:00 00 magnum .200 030:0m .0 .3 000 0005 .0 d ..H .3 00:03 a
000300.000

00 .0280 5 .800: 0c 0:8 0858... 582.6 038 030 08 2053. 2:0 020.0200 033.; 00.3 .5800 a
0.00% B02 .03 .0005 00800000. 000300—03 00 $203.0

.530 .0 .3 05 30 28.00 00 80.380000 3280 .0 233 22o €3.00 :00 05 3.0.02 :00 £30 0 > .5320 0

$005.00 0080.6 .n 00> m0_00> 00560 EN .2003 0500 3.00009 =0m 000 0000002 :3 .0300 a .> 0.080000 3
30305 $02003 .3802 00335 00:01? 000500000 3.5002 .00 EoEt000Q
00050.2 .00 in 000222 00 00000 05 00.0 000000.300 050800 .00 0038008 000 00003000 000303 505 8.0830000 5:000

20020 88 08.000 0 .00 005880 3 B .805...» m .0 0.8050 .< .4 00800 0 .2 .0332 < ..0 0 M 0.08020 3
32-2: .3 00580 50222 50222

.0080 030:0 s 5.02 =3 so 0&3 35200 08 80000; .32 .530 .0. .0 05. £550 .0 .> .0 .00 $8020 0.
.0073— Hon .sgom

=0wE£E 003000 00x00 00000 E00001; 05 5 000202000 00 000000000 05 .00 30051 < .500 500002 .2 .m 000 ..2 .0 00500 An

 

125

boa:.ognqofinbnom_8\m_&>omd3:.m3._$=.§B\\Ha§

«on: :2: v5 853 8.229 2am .8383 33333 .voom .m .2 .58“; Ava
$58.3 60M 28 .5833 d—nmficom 3304 05 .«o >525 98 .awoBoN .3280

05 so 2223890 mcmoahnsm .5253 .3 533m EEO—80 05 .«0 $0305 05 mo ton—om 35on .33 .SE ..< £2353 RN
.30732 ”E. 588m A .50 .mv—Sfio>t 5285.3

860% .«o 3:823 :8 2: 9 33—8 3 8:33 cozfiomo> .32 .owcttam d H 28 £83m ..H. .2 $5M .2 .3 ..m .m dam—m3 ANN

126

APPENDIX B

LIST OF PLANT SPECIES AT THE MAPLE RIVER SALT SEEP

127

 

 

 

Son n5 0 vioaocom .mmm 58.33

.65 a. toaom

88 E 0 83.305 3 83%: afiefim

.5 SE 0 mam—n.9, E20 3m mazfik

om ..5 a 85028 9: omfism

E o mam—a8 SE .a% 3§5

AS .3. .E E 95%» 2&2 .8» know.

Son E o 9:38 #90 .3» gxmzm

sag om ..o omum om SE _ g Ea 3:33 _. A 2.33:3 8326

:38 om .«o uwom om SH .5 3 man .326 .4 3.338 363‘.

fi .E 3 an 3:3.” as: A 32833» s§§8m

he .5 .om 8 use 2;» A 3838 as»:

“.35 3

Son 5 moo... B .8609. 3.59826 53:22 om m 5.2 8mm» BBQ d 16 633.8% auguefim
88 .5522 .6 33.82 om 5 3 033303 A sea 23%

:38 um mo om? 5.5: :o :38 :36 um «AH 2 9.9% >850 wood .4 umogfitg ”Sega

om 2 coo? 98-08. A 35333: Eateckam

om N. m “amazon 4 833303 Eataaam

88 .8 :8 can 33 852 om .3 8 238 E» 3.5

:38 om be ”mum .88 53.83? a 3 #2 & am 2 =35 8888 a 33an 335
:38 om mo omnm .88 sacks u 2. :2 E .8 5 8 =35 «8. 32.32 a n~3x§m§ ES
385% 95 fi .E 3 R .23 8.03m 2:3 33823 33

21.23%

.M a. 5.28 5.5.5 3.6%

«565% b?» .86on team—895 59:22 am 3 58:5 9333.85; ngtusu Sumiozmofim
3:08:80 8:804 ~826on 25c :oEEoU 360% Eur—

 

 

 

 

 

 

..80» 35 5 950m 3:0 33 860% «an» 6288 $5888 05
5 35:58 83 Box a a A88 van—anus 93 65:03 83.08qu .83 3286.8 9: guasumh .83 33:38“. ageing
uéuuiozgumuomv 5:80. .8303 83 38% some 303 .«o 8022. msaaomvfi maggot .QgEm 8.8%.: 2. $3555

98 8305 Bob §8€£ .. .mmo> 82m :83 883 052863 8:3: 55 noon :8 53% 2%: 2: 3 258 $53 .m 532:?

128

.873 um :o>oZ .Aoaoofloqzov

EESAASBEA 98 .fimflofi .mazmofimafigm 6583385” .8285 5.52 5 553588 Bo Z .32 .0 .m JEEP...

sunken 302 dofioctA .05 $59.80 38qu

s~> .Q .avflao 808.35 93 «38m vomcD Ecum8stoZAo flaw—A 3383’ A0 3:52 .83 3395.6 .< 93 .< .D £0320...

 

 

 

 

 

AD 0 N tam
Doom AD o 2.5m
Doom AD 0 g 330
Doom AD 0 an 880
88 he : g :80
Laonom
Doom 3A e 50A €32 mtauéa utagusm
BA .om SH mm 3.302 dun 35¢
Doom AD 0 838200 dun Emfiavv.
gov—com
3A 2 omammxam 5200 Egutusc EamnmNAnonSD
coon AD w zomoaufio x3222 2335“. 33:29»
ooom AD 0 830.com x3222 SubtoNSw .3ch
coon AD 0 68—0 d3 ESNQEA
ooom AD 0 xaa 309 Am» 3.23:3
coon 3A 0 Egan—A dam omSSuNA
3A .AD 3 Bubmvom .qu fiaacw
sea om mo owcm am ..5 o 333m .9: ssfiém
coon AD 0 vooBtaEm dun Egumbom
Eomme
88 AD 0 5:3ch actwugo E§§§A
.5 o €355 2:5 3:3 gang: unmask
88 .5 o 283 “Ema, Em Ea§§EA
33.9
E .AD a A3 :88A 6d .3333; togguwxfi
$58800 .5383 flocoswoi 08.8 58:50 360% 5E

 

 

:53 m €33

 

 

129

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

u+WM».WW