Vegetative succession and decomposition in reservoirs

Abstract

Abstract. Vegetative succession and decomposition in reservoirs are examined. Information is summarized on vegetative tolerance to inundation, subsequent aquatic plant succession, sources of detritus, factors affecting the rate and extent of decomposition, organisms involved in decomposition, the sequence of decomposition, and the effects of decomposition on water quality. The processes of vegetative succession and decomposition in reservoirs are essentialy the same as those occurring in natural lakes. Succession is hastened in reservoirs compared with natural lakes by greater watershed loadings and proportionately greater inputs of refractory detritus. The lifespan of reservoirs is relatively limited and will depend on several factors such as basin morphometry, flushing rate, and site preparation which interact to control rates of production and decomposition.

An integrated approach to hydropower impact assessment. I. Environmental features of some Norwegian hydro-electric lakes

“…Magadza, 1979;Coulter et al, 1983) might support that conclusion, but evidence produced there was largely circumstantial. Following an impoundment stage, a surge of terrestrialoriginated material is expected, the decomposition of which could induce at least transient changes in reservoir hydrochemistry (Baxter, 1977;Vogt, 1978;Godshalk & Barko, 1985).…”

Decomposition of dominant submerged macrophytes: implications for nutrient release in Myall Lake, NSW, Australia

“…When the macrophytes die, decomposition process is set up. The release of nutrients raises the nutrient concentration in the water (Goldshalk and Wetzel 1978;Howard-Williams and Allanson 1981;Godshalk and Barko 1985). Decomposition of aquatic macrophytes can therefore substantially regulate the recycling of nutrients in fresh water ecosystems for a long time (Richardson 1994;Carpenter and Lodge 1986;Asaeda et al 2002), and is essential to the nutrients dynamics of fresh water ecosystems (Rich and Wetzel 1978;Webster and Benfield 1986;Battle and Mihuc 2000;Asaeda et al 2001).…”

Macrophyte management: An integrated perspective

“…• Biologically orientated contributions having a significant bearing on macrophyte management include papers on the role of seed banks and water level fluctuations in macrophyte dynamics (Keddy & Reznicek 1986), the role of temperature and light in the depth distribution of macrophytes (Dale 1986), macrophyte-dependent nutrient cycling in reservoirs (Filbin & Barko 1985), mechanisms of sediment-related limits to macrophyte growth (Barko & Smart 1986) and an ecobiomorphological classification of macrophytes (Papchenkov 1986). In an extensive review, Nichols & Shaw (1986) provide a discerning analysis that integrates lifecycle biology with the nuisance status of several weed species, while Godshalk & Barko (1985) have reviewed aquatic plant succession in a management context as it relates to reservoirs. The relationship between environmental factors (light, temperature, and nutrients) and macrophyte management has been reviewed by .…”