EDGES AND RUSHES OF MINNESOTA: THE COMPLETEGUIDETOSPECIESIDENTIFICATION. Welby R. Smith; photography by Richard Haug.

Even the most seasoned individual with a plant identification background can relate to the difficulty of identifying sedges and rushes to the species level. Historically, one has had to rely on dichotomous keys to identify a sedge or rush species in the field. After hours of frustration, a person ends up collecting the plant and, if lucky, bringing the collection back to a herbarium where it can be compared to known specimens. I have been collecting and identifying sedge and rush species for over 25 years, and author Welby Smith along with photographer Richard Haug have published what I believe will be considered one of the most usable field guides for sedge and rush identification in the upper Midwest. I believe I should mention early in this review what makes this book such an amazing resource for field identification of sedges and rushes—the photography. The photography is of the highest quality I have ever seen! The array of photographs included with each species focuses on the characteristics that clearly differentiate one species from another. Each species usually has a photograph of the whole plant and sometimes the plant within its habitat. There are always photographs of the inflorescence and fruit, including perigynia or capsules and achenes or seeds. For example, the genus Carex includes photographs of the scale (sometimes the scale with the perigynium), the perigynium (usually dorsal and ventral views), and the achene, and in certain cases there are multiple photographs of each showing the changes in color during the season. Most of the photographs are of living plants and their parts, which is exactly what one would see in the field. Having pointed out this fact, it is mind-boggling how much time and effort that the people involved in the production of this book must have dedicated to putting this resource together. It had to be a passion or, at least, an obsession toward perfection

Significant Surface-Water Connectivity of Geographically Isolated Wetlands

We evaluated the current literature, coupled with our collective research expertise, on surface-water connectivity of wetlands considered to be geographically isolated (sensu Tiner Wetlands 23:494–516, 2003a) to critically assess the scientific foundation of grouping wetlands based on the singular condition of being surrounded by uplands. The most recent research on wetlands considered to be geographically isolated shows the difficulties in grouping an ecological resource that does not reliably indicate lack of surface water connectivity in order to meet legal, regulatory, or scientific needs. Additionally, the practice of identifying geographically isolated wetlands based on distance from a stream can result in gross overestimates of the number of wetlands lacking ecologically important surface-water connections. Our findings do not support use of the overly simplistic label of geographically isolated wetlands . Wetlands surrounded by uplands vary in function and surface water connections based on wetland landscape setting, context, climate, and geographic region and should be evaluated as such. We found that the geographically isolated grouping does not reflect our understanding of the hydrologic variability of these wetlands and hence does not benefit conservation of the Nation’s diverse wetland resources. Therefore, we strongly discourage use of categorizations that provide overly simplistic views of surface water connectivity of wetlands fully embedded in upland landscapes

Geographically Isolated Wetlands: Rethinking a Misnomer

Abstract We explore the category Bgeographically isolated wetlands^(GIWs; i.e., wetlands completely surrounded by uplands at the local scale) as used in the wetland sciences. As currently used, the GIW category (1) hampers scientific efforts by obscuring important hydrological and ecological differences among multiple wetland functional types, (2) aggregates wetlands in a manner not reflective of regulatory and management information needs, (3) implies wetlands so described are in some way Bisolated,^an often incorrect implication, (4) is inconsistent with more broadly used and accepted concepts of Bgeographic isolation,^and (5) has injected unnecessary confusion into scientific investigations and discussions. Instead, we suggest other wetland classification systems offer more informative alternatives. For example, hydrogeomorphic (HGM) classes based on wellestablished scientific definitions account for wetland functional diversity thereby facilitating explorations into questions of connectivity without an a priori designation of Bisolation.^Additionally, an HGM-type approach could be used in combination with terms reflective of current regulatory or policymaking needs. For those rare cases in which the condition of being surrounded by uplands is the relevant distinguishing characteristic, use of terminology that does not unnecessarily imply isolation (e.g., Bupland embedded wetlands^) would help alleviate much confusion caused by the Bgeographically isolated wetlands^misnomer

EDGES AND RUSHES OF MINNESOTA: THE COMPLETEGUIDETOSPECIESIDENTIFICATION. Welby R. Smith; photography by Richard Haug.

Even the most seasoned individual with a plant identification background can relate to the difficulty of identifying sedges and rushes to the species level. Historically, one has had to rely on dichotomous keys to identify a sedge or rush species in the field. After hours of frustration, a person ends up collecting the plant and, if lucky, bringing the collection back to a herbarium where it can be compared to known specimens. I have been collecting and identifying sedge and rush species for over 25 years, and author Welby Smith along with photographer Richard Haug have published what I believe will be considered one of the most usable field guides for sedge and rush identification in the upper Midwest. I believe I should mention early in this review what makes this book such an amazing resource for field identification of sedges and rushes—the photography. The photography is of the highest quality I have ever seen! The array of photographs included with each species focuses on the characteristics that clearly differentiate one species from another. Each species usually has a photograph of the whole plant and sometimes the plant within its habitat. There are always photographs of the inflorescence and fruit, including perigynia or capsules and achenes or seeds. For example, the genus Carex includes photographs of the scale (sometimes the scale with the perigynium), the perigynium (usually dorsal and ventral views), and the achene, and in certain cases there are multiple photographs of each showing the changes in color during the season. Most of the photographs are of living plants and their parts, which is exactly what one would see in the field. Having pointed out this fact, it is mind-boggling how much time and effort that the people involved in the production of this book must have dedicated to putting this resource together. It had to be a passion or, at least, an obsession toward perfection

Impacts and Drivers of Smooth Brome (<i>Bromus inermis</i> Leyss.) Invasion in Native Ecosystems

Smooth brome (Bromus inermis Leyss.) is an invasive cool-season grass that has spread throughout the Great Plains of North America. The species is considered one of the most widespread exotic grasses that has successfully invaded both cool-season and warm-season native prairies. In the prairies where it has invaded, there has often been a total elimination of native species and an overall homogenization of ecosystems. Smooth brome has greater competitive abilities compared to many native grasses and can foster their total elimination in many instances. The greater competitiveness can be partially attributed to its ability to alter the soil and hydrological properties of a site. It is a deep-rooted rhizomatous grass species that thrives in nitrogen-enriched soil, and since its leaf tissue decomposes faster than native species, it in turn increases the soil nitrogen level, causing positive plant-soil feedback. Moreover, smooth brome is able to transport the required nutrients from older plants to the newer progenies invading new nutrient-depleted areas, making it a potent invader. However, the impact of smooth brome is not limited to soil biochemistry alone; it also affects other ecosystem components such as the movement and behavior of many native arthropods, thereby altering the overall population dynamics of such species. Thus, smooth brome invasion poses a serious threat to the remnant prairies of the Great Plains, and efficient management strategies are urgently needed to control its invasion. Control measures such as mowing, grazing, burning, and herbicide application have been effectively used to manage this species. However, due to the widespread distribution of smooth brome across North America and its adaptability to a wide range of environmental conditions, it is challenging to translate the management strategies from one area to another

Kentucky Bluegrass Invasion in the Northern Great Plains and Prospective Management Approaches to Mitigate Its Spread

Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.) is one of the most aggressive grasses invading Northern Great Plains (NGP) grasslands, resulting in substantial native species losses. Highly diverse grasslands dominated by native species are gradually transforming into rangelands largely dominated by non-native Kentucky bluegrass. Several factors potentially associated with Kentucky bluegrass invasions, including high propagule pressure, thatch formation, climate change, and increasing nitrogen deposition, could determine the future dominance and spread of Kentucky bluegrass in the NGP. Because atmospheric CO2 is amplifying rapidly, a C3 grass like Kentucky bluegrass might be photosynthetically more efficient than native C4 grasses. As this exotic species shares similar morphological and phenological traits with many native cool-season grasses, controlling it with traditional management practices such as prescribed fire, grazing, herbicides, or combinations of these practices may also impair the growth of native species. Thus, developing effective management practices to combat Kentucky bluegrass spread while facilitating the native species cover is essential. Modifying traditional techniques and embracing science-based adaptive management tools that focus on the ecological interactions of Kentucky bluegrass with the surrounding native species could achieve these desired management goals. Enhancement of the competitiveness of surrounding native species could also be an important consideration for controlling this invasive species

Riparian Ecosystems of North Dakota

R-153

Grazing Intensity Effects on Northern Plains Mixed-Grass Prairie

We evaluated the effects of long-term (1988 to 2000) grazing on northern mixed-grass prairie at tI.e Central Grasslands Research Extension Center in south-central North Dakota. We did not detect a difference in herbaceous basal cover between grazing intensities following 12 consecutive years of season-long moderate (50% removal of annual above-ground standing crop) and heavy (80% removal of annual above-ground standing crop) grazing. However, both moderate and heavy grazing intensities reduced above-ground herbaceous standing crop, total root biomass, and soil organic carbon. Moderate grazing intensity maintained a greater amount of deep (10 to 20 cm) and total root biomass relative to heavy grazing intensity. Several of our findings were in contrast to earlier studies on the same grazing intensity trials, highlighting the importance of considering both short- and long-term effects of grazing intensity on mixed-grass prairie

Grazing Riparian Ecosystems: Grazing Intensity

R-154

Grazing Riparian Ecosystems: Water Developments

R-154