1. Interaction of Invasive Plants with Environment and Other Biota Eric Dibble Bill James Susan Wilde

2. A.Areas overlooked: Lack information on how plant community shifts alter habitat 1. Need to assess habitat changes due to shifts in plant abundance, biomass, structure, type, and diversity. 2. Need to document plant species replacement and succession after invasive species control 3. Investigate how important habitat components impact the aquatic community e.g. (invertebrates, fishes) 4. Most focus has been directed to impacts on sport fishes, primarily Centrachidae. Diversify to impact on other phytophylic fishes (especially rare and threatened species already impacted by shoreline development, i.e. killifish, darters, and rare minnows)? 5. Much of the fish/plant research has been down in artificial systems (i.e., Southern reservoirs). Similar studies need to be conducted in natural systems with natural fishes and plants.

3. 6. Considerable work on plant/invertebrate relationships however, little is known on how trophic relationship among plankton, macroinvertebrates, early life stages, and adult fishes. 7. Need to investigate how changes in vegetated habitat alter detritus based food chains. 8.More information is needed on the effects of invasive plant species on the surrounding environment to address: Are dynamics different compared to native plant community interactions with the environment? Do these impacts result in detrimental water quality that can affect other trophic levels? How are littoral-pelagic interactions affected when an invasive species colonizes the littoral zone? A.Areas overlooked continued:

4. 9. Need information on how effects of management (i.e., mechanical, chemical, biological, and /or introduction of plants) impact habitat components differently? 10. Need to determine the best scientific approach at addressing these questions? (multi-scale manipulative experimentation in ponds, mesocosms, field or laboratory). 11.Investigate whether habitats for parasites and pathogens are plant specific. 12. Need to understand how changes in species architecture (structure) due to epiphytes affect higher trophic levels. 13. Little is known about macrophyte invasion impacts on pelagic community dynamics and water quality. A.Areas overlooked continued:

5. B. Benefit to Management: 1. Provide measurable attributes within aquatic plants important in quantifying changes in habitat due to invasive species management 2. Provides data to assess how different plant management strategies impact aquatic habitats and ecosystem function. 3. Provide metrics for habitat indices and/or assessment of habitat quality in littoral zones. 4. Provide metrics to assess feasibility and cost efficiency of management protocol. 5. Improves the communication if the factors important to ecosystem function by providing a means of standardization of important components in habitat.

6. C. Obstacles: 1. Lack of a scientific approach (i.e., study design, data collection, and reporting data in the scientific literature) before during and after many reporting data in the scientific literature) before during and after many plant management projects. plant management projects. 2. Frequently management goals do not include ecological objectives. 3. Plant/environmental interactions are ecologically complex and very difficult to study, and requires innovative scientific approaches and methodologies. 4. Preconceived ideas of habitat and ecosystem function, and value of plant management lead to lack of effective communication among stake holders.

7. C. Obstacles continued: 5. Funding is usually targets plant control rather than fully understanding the important of plants in the ecosystem. 6. There is a general lack of ecological knowledge by public which makes it difficult to promote interest and understanding to support appropriate ecological based management.

8. Over coming obstacles: 1. Researchers and managers need to design scientific studies around plant management projects to better understand changes in aquatic habitat, water quality and other biota. 2. This collaboration could facilitate the inclusion of ecological objectives in management efforts. 3. Assemble multidisciplinary scientist to evaluate complex plant/environmental interactions. 4. Concrete data demonstrating habitat, fisheries, and water quality improvement following management will lead to better communication among stake holders.

9. 5. Funding should be directed toward management projects that incorporate ecological evaluations. 6. We should target environmental education at the local level specific to stakeholders in our aquatic systems. i.e. Lake Association, Bass masters, Ducks Unlimited. Over coming obstacles continued:

10. Research Priorities for Invasive Aquatic Plants Eric Dibble, Eric Dibble, Bill James, Bill James, Susan Wilde Susan Wilde