Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-92wsb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-20T09:29:36.206Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Reforesting Upper Mississippi River floodplain openings colonized by invasive species

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2025

Lyle Guyon*
Affiliation:
Senior Research Scientist, National Great Rivers Research and Education Center, East Alton, IL, USA
Shelby Weiss
Affiliation:
Postdoctoral Research Associate, National Great Rivers Research and Education Center, East Alton, IL, USA
Abigail Tarleton
Affiliation:
NSF REU Intern, National Great Rivers Research and Education Center, East Alton, IL, USA
Robert Cosgriff
Affiliation:
Supervisory Biologist, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Rivers Project Office, West Alton, MO, USA
*
Corresponding author: Lyle Guyon; Email: lguyon@lc.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The invasive plant species Japanese hop (Humulus japonicus Siebold & Zucc.) and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) are increasing in cover in Upper Mississippi River (UMR) floodplains, where they negatively impact native vegetation. This study evaluated novel reforestation methods to rapidly close canopy openings colonized by invasives and reduce their cover at four study sites ranging from southern Wisconsin to southwestern Illinois. Each site contained three replicates of four 20 by 20 m plots comprising four tree-planting treatments. These included two using large-diameter willow (Salix) cuttings planted at different densities, one using container stock of American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis L.) and eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides W. Bartram ex Marshall), and a control plot with no planted trees. Half of each planting treatment also received maintenance treatments for invasives control. Results indicated that planting and maintenance had significant effects on tree survival, invasives cover, and plant community diversity. Specifically, trees that received maintenance had higher survival than those that did not, and Salix cuttings had higher survival than container stock. Annual tree height growth was greatest in Salix cuttings planted at the highest density. Invasive species cover declined significantly in maintenance treatments and Salix plantings. Change in plant community diversity was greater in maintenance treatments and in Salix plantings, but was still extremely low at the northernmost site. Vegetation patterns were strongly influenced by invasives and reinforced the general inverse relationship between plant community diversity and invasives cover. Overall, results indicated that tree plantings using large Salix cuttings can be an effective method to quickly reforest areas along the UMR that have been colonized by invasive plant species and that incorporating tree-planting maintenance activities in early years can lead to better survival.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Weed Science Society of America
Figure 0

Figure 1. Study site locations along the Upper Mississippi River, USA. Map credits: Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community.

Figure 1

Table 1. Study site characteristics.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Tree survival by planting treatment. Letters correspond to Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) post hoc comparison significance tests. RPM, Root Production Method®.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Annual height growth (m) by planting treatment. Letters correspond to Tukey’s Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) post hoc comparison significance tests. RPM, Root Production Method®.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Cumulative tree heights (m) by study site, planting treatment, and maintenance treatment. RPM, Root Production Method®. Means are indicated by diamond symbols.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Annual diameter growth (cm) by planting treatment. Letters correspond to Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) post hoc comparison significance tests. RPM, Root Production Method®. DBH = diameter at breast height.

Figure 6

Figure 6. Invasive species percent cover change by planting treatment during spring observations at the start and end of the study. Letters correspond to Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) post hoc comparison significance tests. RPM, Root Production Method®.

Figure 7

Table 2. Average percent cover of vegetation by species (top 30), site (GI = Goose Island; PC = Pleasant Creek; RL = Reds Landing; TR = Timber Ridge), and sampling period (SP = spring; FA = fall) in 2022.

Figure 8

Figure 7. Change in plant community diversity (H′) by planting treatment during spring observations at the start and end of the study. Letters correspond to Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) post hoc comparison significance tests. RPM, Root Production Method®.

Figure 9

Figure 8. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) analyses of the plant community, with vegetation plot attributes on species occurrences, gradients of invasive species cover, and Shannon (H′) diversity. Panels correspond to the four different study sites. RPM, Root Production Method®. See Table 2 for species codes (codes for the invasive species are highlighted in red on the figure). Stress = 0.06; dimensions = 3; iterations = 88.