Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24790122›Full record

ArticleAoB PLANTS2014

Phragmites australis management in the United States: 40 years of methods and outcomes.

Eric L G Hazelton, Thomas J Mozdzer, David M Burdick, Karin M Kettenring, Dennis F Whigham

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AoB PLANTS, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Seed Germination inPlant-environment interactions (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  6. Resource Characteristics of Common Reed (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. InvasiveEcology and evolution · 2019
    Article
  19. Phytoremediation potential and control of Phragmites australis as a green phytomass: an overview.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2019
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Eric L G HazeltonDepartment of Watershed Sciences and Ecology Center, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA.
Thomas J Mozdzer
David M Burdick
Karin M Kettenring
Dennis F Whigham

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Studies on invasive plant management are often short in duration and limited in the methods tested, and lack an adequate description of plant communities that replace the invader following removal. Here we present a comprehensive review of management studies on a single species, in an effort to elucidate future directions for research in invasive plant management. We reviewed the literature on Phragmites management in North America in an effort to synthesize our understanding of management efforts, identify gaps in knowledge and improve the efficacy of management. Additionally, we assessed recent ecological findings concerning Phragmites mechanisms of invasion and integrated these findings into our recommendations for more effective management. Our overall goal is to examine whether or not current management approaches can be improved and whether they promote reestablishment of native plant communities. We found: (i) little information on community-level recovery of vegetation following removal of Phragmites; and (ii) most management approaches focus on the removal of Phragmites from individual stands or groups of stands over a relatively small area. With a few exceptions, recovery studies did not monitor vegetation for substantial durations, thus limiting adequate evaluation of the recovery trajectory. We also found that none of the recovery studies were conducted in a landscape context, even though it is now well documented that land-use patterns on adjacent habitats influence the structure and function of wetlands, including the expansion of Phragmites. We suggest that Phragmites management needs to shift to watershed-scale efforts in coastal regions, or larger management units inland. In addition, management efforts should focus on restoring native plant communities, rather than simply eradicating Phragmites stands. Wetlands and watersheds should be prioritized to identify ecosystems that would benefit most from Phragmites management and those where the negative impact of management would be minimal.

Indexed as

Common reedecological restorationherbicideinvasive plantinvasive speciesmanagementPhragmites australiswatershed restoration.

Identifiers

PMID24790122
PMCPMC4038441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.