Macrophytes: Ecology of Aquatic Plants

Gudrun Bornette, Ecology of Fluvial Ecosystems Université Lyon1, Villeurbanne Cedex, France
Sara Puijalon, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO‐KNAW), Yerseke, The Netherlands

Published online: September 2009

DOI: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0020475

Aquatic plants contribute to maintaining key functions and related biodiversity in freshwater ecosystems, and to provide the needs of human societies. The way the ecological niches of macrophytes are determined by abiotic filters and biotic ones is considered. A simple, broadly applicable model of the distribution of growth forms according to abiotic filters is proposed. The consequence for the dynamics of plant communities and the main threats to macrophyte occurrence and diversity are discussed.

Key concepts:

  • Macrophytes contribute to maintaining key functions and related biodiversity in freshwater ecosystems, and to provide the needs of human societies.
  • Most aquatic species are phylogenetically descended from terrestrial plants that have later adapted to aquatic life.
  • Water plants are usually poorly lignified, as water preserves plants from gravitational stress, and are characterized by the presence of aerenchyma, which increases oxygen flux from shoots to roots, and by a large leaf surface, together with a thin cuticle, which increase contact with water and carbon uptake.
  • Macrophyte dispersal relies partly on water drift, and thus on seed buoyancy and on the ability of plants to break themselves up and regrow from broken dispersed fragments, and partly on endozoochory by animals (mainly birds).
  • In freshwater ecosystems, the production, community composition and life-history traits of macrophytes are governed by the availability of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorous.
  • Water movements (waves, flow velocity) tend to select streamlined or prostrate growth forms, and contribute to the dispersal of seeds and vegetative propagules.
  • Moderate disturbances (by floods or drawdowns) decrease biotic interactions in aquatic plant communities and as a consequence favour biodiversity and decrease successional rate.
  • Free-floating and tall species with floating leaves are the most competitive for light, and usually dominate macrophyte communities when nutrient levels in the water are sufficiently high.
  • In the framework of global change, eutrophication of freshwaters, together with decreases in natural disturbance regimes in river floodplains, increases in groundwater abstraction and the increase of temperature may all contribute in decreasing macrophyte biodiversity by favouring competitive and invasive species, to the detriment of ruderal, stress-tolerant poorly competitive ones.

Keywords: nutrient; disturbance; growth form; succession; stress

Figure 1. Expected distribution of the five major growth forms of aquatic plants along several gradients of abiotic factors. For example, for water transparency, species with small rosettes tend to occur preferably in sites with high transparency, whereas free-floating plants will occur more frequently in water with low transparency.
Figure 2. Expected distributions of the five major growth forms of aquatic plants according to nutrient levels (mainly phosphates and ammonium in the water) and flood disturbances. The dark zones of each diagram correspond to the zones that should be more favourable for the group considered. For example, species with small rosettes tend to occur preferably in sites with low to intermediate nutrient levels but can colonize contrasting sites for disturbance levels.
close
 References
    Ackerman JD (2000) Abiotic pollen and pollination: ecological, functional, and evolutionary perspectives. Plant Systematics and Evolution 222: 167–185.
    Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (2003) Classification for the orders and families of flowering plants. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 141: 339–436.
    Appelgren K and Mattila J (2005) Variation in vegetation communities in shallow bays of the northern Baltic Sea. Aquatic Botany 83: 1–13.
    Araki S and Kadono Y (2003) Restricted seed contribution and clonal dominance in a free-floating aquatic plant Utricularia australis R. Br. in southwestern Japan. Ecological Research 18: 599–609.
    Arts GHP (2002) Deterioration of atlantic soft water macrophyte communities by acidification, eutrophication and alkalinisation. Aquatic Botany 73: 373–393.
    Barko JW and Smart RM (1986) Sediment-related mechanisms of growth limitation in submersed macrophytes. Ecology 67: 1328–1340.
    Barrat-Segretain MH, Bornette G and Hering-Vilas-Boas A (1998) Comparative abilities of vegetative regeneration among aquatic plants growing in disturbed habitats. Aquatic Botany 60: 201–211.
    Blom CWPM, Voesenek LACJ, Banga M et al. (1994) Physiological ecology of riverside species: adaptive responses of plants to submergence. Annals of Botany 74: 253–263.
    Boedeltje G, Bakker JP, Ten Brinke A, van Groenendael JM and Soesbergen M (2004) Dispersal phenology of hydrochorous plants in relation to discharge, seed release time and buoyancy of seeds: the flood pulse concept supported. Journal of Ecology 92: 786–796.
    Bornette G, Amoros C and Chessel D (1994) Effect of allogenic processes on successional rates in former river channels. Journal of Vegetation Science 5: 237–246.
    Bornette G, Tabacchi E, Hupp CR, Puijalon S and Rostan J-C (2008) A model of plant strategies in fluvial hydrosystems. Freshwater Biology 53: 1692–1705.
    Boylen CW and Sheldon RB (1976) Submergent macrophytes: growth under winter ice cover. Science 194: 841–842.
    Brock MA, Nielsen DL, Shiel RJ, Green JD and Langley JD (2003) Drought and aquatic community resilience: the role of eggs and seeds in sediments of temporary wetlands. Freshwater Biology 48: 1207–1218.
    Casanova MT and Brock MA (2000) How do depth, duration and frequency of flooding influence the establishment of wetland plant communities? Plant Ecology 147: 237–250.
    Cook CDK (1999) The number and kinds of embryo-bearing plants which have become aquatic. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 2: 79–102.
    Crossley MN, Dennison WC, Williams RR and Wearing AH (2002) The interaction of water flow and nutrients on aquatic plant growth. Hydrobiologia 489: 63–70.
    Elger A, Bornette G, Barrat-Segretain MH and Amoros C (2004) Disturbances as a structuring factor of plant palatability in aquatic communities. Ecology 85: 304–311.
    Elger A and Willby NJ (2003) Leaf dry matter content as an integrative expression of plant palatability: the case of freshwater macrophytes. Functional Ecology 17: 58–65.
    Ervin GN and Wetzel RG (2003) An ecological perspective of allelochemical interference in land-water interface communities. Plant and Soil 256: 13–28.
    van Geest GJ, Coops H, Roijackers RMM, Buijse AD and Scheffer M (2005) Succession of aquatic vegetation driven by reduced water-level fluctuations in floodplain lakes. Journal of Applied Ecology 42: 251–260.
    Goliber TE and Feldman LJ (1989) Osmotic stress, endogenous abcisic acid and the control of leaf morphology in Hippuris vulgaris. Plant, Cell and Environment 12: 163–171.
    Green AJ, Figuerola J and Sanchez MI (2002) Implications of waterbird ecology for the dispersal of aquatic organisms. Acta Oecologica 23: 177–189.
    Greulich S and Bornette G (2003) Being evergreen in an aquatic habitat with attenuated seasonal contrasts – a major competitive advantage? Plant Ecology 167: 9–18.
    Greulich S, Bornette G, Amoros C and Roelofs JGM (2000) Investigation on the fundamental niche of a rare species: an experiment on establishment of Luronium natans. Aquatic Botany 66: 209–224.
    Gross E (2003) Allelopathy of aquatic autotrophs. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 22: 313–339.
    Gross EM, Johnson RL and Hairston NG Jr (2001) Experimental evidence for changes in submersed macrophyte species composition caused by the herbivore Acentria ephemerella (Lepidoptera). Oecologia 127: 105–114.
    Haller WT and Sutton DL (1973) Effect of pH and high phosphorous concentration on growth of waterhyacinth. Journal of Aquatic Plant Management 11: 59–61.
    Handley RJ and Davy AJ (2002) Seedling root establishment may limit Najas marina L. to sediments of low cohesive strength. Aquatic Botany 73: 129–136.
    Henry CP, Amoros C and Bornette G (1996) Species traits and recolonization processes after flood disturbances in riverine macrophytes. Vegetatio 122: 13–27.
    Hilt S and Gross EM (2008) Can allelopathically active submerged macrophytes stabilise clear-water states in shallow lakes? Basic and Applied Ecology 9: 422–432.
    Jeppesen E, Jensen JP, Søndergaard M and Lauridsen TL (1999) Trophic dynamics in turbid and clearwater lakes with special emphasis on the role of zooplankton for water clarity. Hydrobiologia 408/409: 217–231.
    Khan FA and Ansari AA (2005) Eutrophication: an ecological vision. Botanical Review 71: 449–482.
    Lippert BE and Jameson DL (1964) Plant succession in temporary ponds of the Willamette Valley, Oregon. American Midland Naturalist 71: 181–197.
    Lucassen ECHET, Smolders AJP, Lamers LPM and Roelofs JGM (2005) Water table fluctuations and groundwater supply are important in preventing phosphate-eutrophication in sulphate-rich fens: consequences for wetland restoration. Plant and Soil 269: 109–115.
    Maberly SC and Madsen TV (1998) Affinity for CO2 in relation to the ability of freshwater macrophytes to use HCO3–. Functional Ecology 12: 99–106.
    Middelboe AL and Markager S (1997) Depth limits and minimum light requirements of freshwater macrophytes. Freshwater Biology 37: 553–568.
    Noon KF (1996) A model of created wetland primary succession. Landscape and Urban Planning 34: 97–123.
    Pezeshki SR (2001) Wetland plant responses to soil flooding. Environmental and Experimental Botany 46: 299–312.
    Rascio N (2002) The underwater life of secondarily aquatic plants: some problems and solutions. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 21: 401–427.
    Ray AM, Rebertus AJ and Ray HL (2001) Macrophyte succession in Minnesota beaver ponds. Canadian Journal of Botany 79: 487–499.
    Redding TE and Devito KJ (2006) Particle densities of wetland soils in northern Alberta, Canada. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 86: 57–60.
    Sand-Jensen K and Jacobsen D (2002) Herbivory and growth in terrestrial and aquatic populations of amphibious stream plants. Freshwater Biology 47: 1475–1487.
    Schaminee JHJ, van Kley JE and Ozinga WA (2002) The analysis of long-term changes in plant communities: case studies from the Netherlands. Phytocoenologia 32: 317–335.
    Scheffer M, Hosper SH, Meijer ML, Moss B and Jeppesen E (1993) Alternative equilibria in shallow lakes. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 8: 175–279.
    Schneider S (2007) Macrophyte trophic indicator values from a European perspective. Limnologica 37: 281–289.
    Schutten J, Dainty J and Davy AJ (2005) Root anchorage and its significance for submerged plants in shallow lakes. Journal of Ecology 93: 556–571.
    book Sculthorpe CD (1967) The Biology of Aquatic Vascular Plants. London: Edward Arnold.
    Smolders AJP, Lamers LPM, Lucassen ECHET, van der Velde G and Roelofs JGM (2006) Internal eutrophication: how it works and what to do about it – a review. Chemistry and Ecology 22: 93–111.
    Smolders AJP, Vergeer LHT, van der Velde G and Roelofs JGM (2003) Phenolic contents of submerged, emergent and floating leaves of aquatic and semi-aquatic macrophyte species: why do they differ? OIKOS 91: 307–310.
    Sraj-Krzic N, Pongrac P, Klemenc M et al. (2006) Mycorrhizal colonisation in plants from intermittent aquatic habitats. Aquatic Botany 85: 333–338.
    Tanaka N, Uehara K and Murata A (2004) Correlation between pollen morphology and pollination mechanisms in the Hydrocharitaceae. Journal of Plant Research 117: 265–276.
    book Tilman D (1982) Resource Competition and Community Structure. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    Titus JE and Sullivan PG (2001) Heterophylly in the yellow waterlily, Nuphar variegata (Nymphaeaceae): effects of [CO2], natural sediment type, and water depth. American Journal of Botany 88: 1469–1478.
    Van der Valk AG (2005) Water level fluctuations in North American prairie wetlands. Hydrobiologia 539: 171–188.
    Vestergaard O and Sand-Jensen K (2000) Alkalinity and trophic state regulate aquatic plant distribution in Danish lakes. Aquatic Botany 67: 85–107.
    Visser EJW, Colmer TD, Blom CWPM and Voesenek LACJ (2000) Changes in growth, porosity, and radial oxygen loss from adventitious roots of selected mono- and dycotyledonous wetland species with contrasting types of aerenchyma. Plant, Cell and Environment 23: 1237–1245.
    Willby NJ, Abernethy VJ and Demars BOL (2000) Attribute-based classification of European hydrophytes and its relationship to habitat utilization. Freshwater Biology 43: 43–74.
 Further Reading
    Barendregt A and Bio AMF (2003) Relevant variables to predict macrophyte communities in running waters. Ecological Modelling 160: 205–217.
    Barrett SCH, Eckert CG and Husband BC (1993) Evolutionary processes in aquatic plant populations. Aquatic Botany 44: 105–145.
    Caraco N, Cole J, Findlay S and Wigand C (2006) Vascular plants as engineers of oxygen in aquatic systems. BioScience 56: 219–225.
    book Cook CDK (1990) Aquatic Plant Book. The Hague, The Netherlands: SPB Academic publishing.
    Engelhardt KAM and Ritchie ME (2001) Effects of macrophyte species richness on wetland ecosystem functioning and services. Nature 441: 687–689.
    Keeley JE (1998) CAM photosynthesis in submerged aquatic plants. Botanical Review 64: 121–175.
    Lacoul P and Freedman B (2006) Environmental influences on aquatic plants in freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Review 14: 89–136.
    Minorsky PV (2003) Heterophylly in aquatic plants. Plant Physiology 133: 1671–1672.
    Oertli B, Auderset Joye D, Castella E et al. (2005) PLOCH: a standardized method for sampling and assessing the biodiversity in ponds. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 15: 665–679.
    Pagano AM and Titus JE (2007) Submersed macrophyte growth at low pH: carbon source influences response to dissolved inorganic carbon enrichment. Freshwater Biology 52: 2412–2420.
    Puijalon S, Léna JP, Rivière N et al. (2008) Phenotypic plasticity in response to mechanical stress: hydrodynamic performance and fitness of 4 aquatic plant species. New Phytologist 177: 907–917.
    Santamaria L (2002) Why are most aquatic plants widely distributed? Dispersal, clonal growth and small-scale heterogeneity in a stressful environment. Acta Oecologica 23: 137–154.
    Sawada M, Viau AE and Gajewski K (2003) The biogeography of aquatic macrophytes in North America since the Last Glacial Maximum. Journal of Biogeography 30: 999–1017.
    Wells CL and Pigliucci M (2000) Adaptive phenotypic plasticity: the case of heterophylly in aquatic plants. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 3: 1–18.
    Wisheu IC and Keddy PA (1992) Competition and centrifugal organization of plant communities: theory and tests. Journal of Vegetation Science 3: 147–156.

Related Sub-Topics:

Biomes and Ecosystems | Organisms and the Physical Environment | Community Structure | Plant Ecology
Contact Editor close
Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

Article Title: Macrophytes: Ecology of Aquatic Plants
 
How to Cite close
Bornette, Gudrun, and Puijalon, Sara(Sep 2009) Macrophytes: Ecology of Aquatic Plants. In: eLS. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. http://www.els.net [doi: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0020475]