Carex stricta, upright sedge
Coladonato, Milo 1994. Carex stricta, upright sedge. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: https://research.fs.usda.gov/feis/species-reviews/carstr
| Abbreviation | Common Name | Scientific Name | Classification | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plants | ||||
| CARSTR | upright sedge | Carex stricta | Life Form: Plants/Graminoid Kingdom: Plantae Class: Monocot Order: Cyperales Family: Cyperaceae Genus: Carex | Fed. Protected: No Nativity: Native Invasiveness: Noninvasive |
Taxonomy
The scientific name of upright sedge is Carex stricta Lam. (Cyperaceae) [13].
Upright sedge hybridizes with many other Carex species [4].
Synonyms
- Carex stricta var. strictior Dewey [13,28]
- Carex strictior Dewey
Other Common Names
tussock sedge
General Distribution
Upright sedge occurs from Newfoundland south to the Carolinas and Tennessee and from Manitoba south to eastern Oklahoma and Texas [12,14,19,20].
Distribution of upright sedge.
States and Provinces
- United States: AR CT DE IL IN IA KS KY ME MD MA MI MN MO NE NH NJ NY NC ND OH OK PA RI SC SD TN TX VT VA WV WI WY
- Canada: MB NB NF NS ON PE PQ
Site Characteristics
Upright sedge is found in bogs, wet meadows, floodplains, swales, marshes, and wet woodlands. It is found in areas where the soil is at or just above the water level [5,12].
Upright sedge growing in shallow water in Massachusetts.
Plant Communities
Upright sedge is a moist-site species [19]. It is often dominant in meadows in New England and the upper Midwest [7,22]. Upright sedge also occurs in moist forest communities [23,31].
Common associates of upright sedge include blueberries (Vaccinium spp.), huckleberries (Gaylussacia spp.), common winterberry (Ilex verticillata) bog rush (Juncus effusus), bog Labrador tea (Ledum groenlandicum), Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii var. gerardii), bluejoint reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis), and other sedges (Carex spp.) [3,7,15,17].
Botanical Description
Upright sedge is a rhizomatous sedge reaching a height of about 3 feet (1 m) [16]. The long narrow leaves are 0.25 inches (0.6 cm) wide and about 2.5 feet (75 cm) long [19]. The wirelike rhizomes are usually found in the top 6 inches (15 cm) of the soil and are variable in length [5]. The fruit is an achene [14].
Reproductive upright sedge.
Raunkiaer Life Form (Raunkiaer 1934)
- Hemicryptophyte
Seasonal Development
Depending on site, upright sedge flowers from late May to mid-June. The fruit ripens in August [8,17].
Regeneration Processes
Upright sedge regenerates primarily through rhizomes. Two types of rhizomes are distinguished. Long rhizomes branch and produce distant plants. Short rhizomes produce culms just offset from the parent [5].
Propagation: Propagation tests for upright sedge in Wisconsin showed variable results. Seeds collected and planted within 2 weeks in 1988 were compared with seeds collected in 1987 and held in cold storage for 1 year. Germination rates for seeds collected and planted in 1988 were 70 to 95 percent; 1-year-old seeds showed less than 15 percent germination. These results indicated that seeds should be planted while still fresh, preferably within a week or two following harvest [1].
Successional Status
Upright sedge is shade intolerant hydro-successional species in the sedge meadow community [5,17,26]. The sedge community is preceded by an emergent marsh community of reeds (Phragmites spp.) and/or cattails (Typha spp.) where the water is above the soil. The sedge community is followed by a shrub community of willows (Salix spp.), dogwoods (Cornus spp.), and/or alders (Alnus spp.) as drier conditions are produced [5].
Immediate Fire Effects
Fires that occur when meadows are moist or wet probably top-kill tussock sedge. The rhizomes are probably killed by severe fires that remove most of the soil organic layer [5].
Postfire Regeneration Strategy (Stickney 1989)
- Rhizomatous herb, rhizome in soil
Fire Adaptations
The rhizomes of upright sedge make it resistant to fires that burn little of the soil organic layer. Fire is important to the maintenance of the sedge meadow community where upright sedge grows [5,6]. It is a natural feature of this environment and prevents the encroachment of shrubs and trees. The wet habitat usually protects the roots and rhizomes from fire. During severe droughts or when the meadows have been partially or completely drained, however, fire has serious effects. Underlying peat beds may ignite and smolder for long periods of time Such fires can destroy roots of most plants. By lowering the meadow surface and reducing plant cover, such fires may also convert a sedge meadow to an emergent marsh community [5,10].
Upright sedge probably colonizes burned areas by seeds and rhizomes.
Plant Response to Fire
Upright sedge is typically an increaser following fire. In a study on the effects of burning on sedge meadows in Wisconsin, upright sedge was found to occur at higher numbers on burned areas than on unburned areas [29]. A spring fire was set in 1973 in Ontario to study the short-term response of the shrub and herb layers. Upright sedge had already emerged at the time of the fire. Percent cover of upright sedge was similar in control and burned plots that summer. Later-emerging associated species, however, showed more vigorous postfire growth; the initially lower cover of upright sedge may have been due to fire damage to early spring growth. At postfire month 15, upright sedge cover was significantly (p=0.05) greater on burned plots than on unburned plots [23].
Fire Regimes
For fire regime information, search FEIS for this species by entering the species name or acronym on the home page and selecting “Fire Regime” as the publication type.
Fire Management Considerations
No entry.
Fire Case Study: Effect of prescribed burning on upright sedge in quaking aspen woodlands in southern Ontario
References
James, T. D. W.; Smith, D. W. 1977. Short-term effects of surface fire on the biomass and nutrient standing crop of Populus tremuloides in southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 7: 666-679. [33].
Smith, D. W.; James, T. D. W. 1978. Changes in the shrub and herb layers of vegetation after prescribed burning in Populus tremuloides woodland in southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Botany. 56: 1792-1797. [23].
Smith, D. W.; James, T. D. 1978. Characteristics of prescribed burns and resultant short-term environmental changes in Populus tremuloides woodland in southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Botany. 56: 1782-1791. [31].
Season/Severity Classification
Spring/Low
Study Location
The study was conducted at the Mullin Tract in West Luther Township, Wellington County, Ontario.
Prefire Vegetative Community
The prefire vegetation was dominated by an open stand of trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides) (164 stems/ha, average d.b.h. 14 cm) with red-osier dogwood (Cornus sericea) in the shrub layer. The herb layer was codominated by upright sedge (Carex stricta) and bluejoint reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis).
Target Species Phenological State
No specific information was given on the phenological state of tussock sedge, but it was probably in a pre-flowering condition during these spring fires.
Site Description
The site is at an elevation of 1,221 feet (470 m). Mean total precipitation is 35.4 inches per year (885 mm/yr), the average length of the growing season is 116 days, and the July mean daily temperature is 70 degrees Fahrenheit (21 deg C). The study was located on poorly drained, organic muck soils approximately 1 foot (3 m) in depth. The area had generally low relief but consisted of a mosaic of hummocks and hollows, the latter filled with standing water in the early spring.
Fire Description
| Burn plot | Date | Wind speed (m/min) | Relative humidity (%) | Ambient temperature (°C) | Dead fuel combusted (g/m2) | Reaction intensity (kw/m2/min) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8 May 1972 | 91.7 | 56 | 14 | 674.7 | 509 |
| 2 | 8 May 1972 | 87.4 | 58 | 15 | 750.4 | 375 |
| 3 | 24 April 1973 | 43.5 | 72 | 13 | 756.2 | 569 |
| 4 | 24 April 1973 | 68.7 | 43 | 15 | 651.1 | 489 |
Standard deviations are reported for wind speed, fuel combustion, and reaction intensity data [2].
Fuel moisture content was "generally high" on the treatment plots in both 1972 and 1973 and evidently tended to reduce fire intensity. The pattern of burning in both years was heterogeneous. This was related to the uneven microtopography and patchy distribution of fuel prior to the fires. Areas dominated by upright sedge had large amounts of surface litter and standing dead material and consequently were the most thoroughly burned.
Fire Effects on Target Species
Short-term postfire response of upright sedge after light prescribed surface fire in trembling aspen woodlands were as follows:
| Treatment | Abundance (%) | Frequency (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Burned April 1973 | 43.5 | 87.5 |
| Burned May 1972 | 70.0 | 96.0 |
| Control | 54.0 | 83.5 |
Abundance of burned and control populations was not significantly different (p=0.05) at postfire year 1. Growth of the burned population may have been affected by scorch or by increased competition from bluejoint reedgrass. Upright sedge was substantially more abundant in the plots measured 15 months following fire.
Federal Status
None
Other Status
No entry.
Importance to Wildlife and Livestock
No entry.
Value for Rehabilitation or Restoration of Disturbed Sites
Upright sedge established well in constructed wetland in Massachusetts. It became dominant 1 to 2 years after construction [32].
Other Uses
No entry.
Other Management Considerations
Shrub invasion is altering sedge meadows in Wisconsin that contain upright sedge. Invaded areas were consistently wetter than uninvaded sedge meadows [29].
Table A1— Forest and range ecosystems, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) physiographic regions, Kuchler plant associations, Society for American Foresters (SAF) forest cover types, and Society for Rangeland Management (SRM) rangeland cover types in which this species occurs.
Forest and Range Ecosystems (Garrison et al. 1977)
- FRES10 White - red - jack pine
- FRES11 Spruce - fir
- FRES12 Longleaf - slash pine
- FRES13 Loblolly - shortleaf pine
- FRES14 Oak - pine
- FRES15 Oak - hickory
- FRES17 Elm - ash - cottonwood
- FRES18 Maple - beech - birch
- FRES19 Aspen - birch
- FRES38 Plains grasslands
- FRES39 Prairie
- FRES41 Wet grasslands
BLM Physiographic Regions (Bernard and Brown 1977)
- 10 Wyoming Basin
- 14 Great Plains
- 16 Upper Missouri Basin and Broken Lands
Kuchler Plant Associations (Kuchler 1964)
- K064 Grama - needlegrass - wheatgrass
- K067 Wheatgrass - bluestem - needlegrass
- K073 Northern cordgrass prairie
- K074 Bluestem prairie
- K079 Palmetto prairie
- K081 Oak savanna
- K082 Mosaic of K074 and K100
- K084 Cross Timbers
- K093 Great Lakes spruce - fir forest
- K095 Great Lakes pine forest
- K096 Northeastern spruce - fir forest
- K098 Northern floodplain forest
- K099 Maple - basswood forest
- K100 Oak - hickory forest
- K101 Elm - ash forest
- K102 Beech - maple forest
- K103 Mixed mesophytic forest
- K106 Northern hardwoods
- K107 Northern hardwoods - fir forest
- K108 Northern hardwoods - spruce forest
- K111 Oak - hickory - pine forest
- K112 Southern mixed forest
SAF Cover Types (Eyre 1980)
- 1 Jack pine
- 14 Northern pin oak
- 15 Red pine
- 16 Aspen
- 17 Pin cherry
- 20 White pine - northern red oak - red maple
- 21 Eastern white pine
- 22 White pine - hemlock
- 23 Eastern hemlock
- 24 Hemlock - yellow birch
- 25 Sugar maple - beech - yellow birch
- 26 Sugar maple - basswood
- 32 Red spruce
- 42 Bur oak
- 44 Chestnut oak
- 46 Eastern redcedar
- 51 White pine - chestnut oak
- 52 White oak - black oak - northern red oak
- 53 White oak
- 55 Northern red oak
- 62 Silver maple - American elm
- 64 Sassafras - persimmon
- 70 Longleaf pine
- 81 Loblolly pine
- 82 Loblolly pine - hardwood
- 110 Black oak
SRM Rangeland Cover Types (Shiflet 1994)
- No entry
1. Apfeelbaum, S. I.; Leach, M.; Baller, R. 1989. Report propagation results for Carex spp., other wetland species (Wisconsin). Restoration and Management Notes. 7(1): 38-39. [8064]
2. Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals, reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p. [434]
3. Bray, William L. 1920. The history of forest development on an undrained sand plain in the Adirondacks. Syracuse, NY: New York State College of Forestry. 47 p. [21340]
4. Cayouette, J.; Catling, P. M. 1992. Hybridization in the genus Carex with special reference to North America. Botanical Review. 58(4): 351-440. [20465]
5. Curtis, John T. 1959. The vegetation of Wisconsin. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press. 657 p. [7116]
6. Davis, Anthony M. 1979. Wetland succession, fire and the pollen record: a Midwestern example. American Midland Naturalist. 102(1): 86-94. [7311]
7. Dunlop, D. A. 1987. Community classification of the vascular vegetation of a New Hampshire peatland. Rhodora. 89(860): 415-440. [20275]
8. Eckardt, Nancy A.; Biesboer, David D. 1988. Ecological aspects of nitrogen fixation (acetylene reduction) associated with plants of a Minnesota wetland community. Canadian Journal of Botany. 66: 1359-1363. [14893]
9. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
10. Frolik, A. L. 1941. Vegetation on the peat lands of Dane County, Wisconsin. Ecological Monographs. 11(1): 117-140. [16805]
11. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others]. 1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]
12. Godfrey, Robert K.; Wooten, Jean W. 1981. Aquatic and wetland plants of southeastern United States: Dicotyledons. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press. 933 p. [16907]
13. Gleason, Henry A.; Cronquist, Arthur. 1991. Manual of vascular plants of northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. 2nd ed. New York: New York Botanical Garden. 910 p. [20329]
14. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]
15. Hotchkiss, Neil; Stewart, Robert E. 1947. Vegetation of the Patuxent Research Refuge, Maryland. American Midland Naturalist. 38(1): 1-75. [22000]
16. Knobel, Edward; Faust, Mildred E. 1980. Field guide to the grasses, sedges and rushes of the United States. 2d rev. ed. New York: Dover Publications, Inc. 83 p. [14744]
17. Kudish, Michael. 1992. Adirondack upland flora: an ecological perspective. Saranac, NY: The Chauncy Press. 320 p. [19377]
18. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. Manual to accompany the map of potential vegetation of the conterminous United States. Special Publication No. 36. New York: American Geographical Society. 77 p. [1384]
19. Magee, Dennis W. 1981. Freshwater wetlands: A guide to common indicator plants of the Northeast. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press. 245 p. [14824]
20. Radford, Albert E.; Ahles, Harry E.; Bell, C. Ritchie. 1968. Manual of the vascular flora of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press. 1183 p. [7606]
21. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]
22. Reuter, D. Dayton. 1986. Effects of prescribed burning, cutting and torching on shrubs in a sedge meadow wetland. In: Koonce, Andrea L., ed. Prescribed burning in the Midwest: state-of-the-art: Proceedings of a symposium; 1986 March 3-6; Stevens Point, WI. Stevens Point, WI: University of Wisconsin, College of Natural Resources, Fire Science Center: 108-115. [16278]
23. Smith, D. W.; James, T. D. W. 1978. Changes in the shrub and herb layers of vegetation after prescribed burning in Populus tremuloides woodland in southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Botany. 56: 1792-1797. [16400]
24. Standley, Lisa A. 1989. Taxonomic revision of the Carex stricta (Cyperaceae) complex in eastern North America. Canadian Journal of Botany. 67: 1-14. [22093]
25. Stickney, Peter F. 1989. Seral origin of species originating in northern Rocky Mountain forests. Unpublished draft on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT; RWU 4403 files. 7 p. [20090]
26. Tiner, Ralph W. 1991. The concept of a hydrophyte for wetland identification. Bioscience. 41(4): 236-247. [16878]
27. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2018. PLANTS Database, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (Producer). Available: https://plants.usda.gov/. [34262]
28. Voss, Edward G. 1972. Michigan flora. Part I. Gymnosperms and monocots. Bloomfield Hills, MI: Cranbrook Institute of Science; Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Herbarium. 488 p. [11471]
29. Warners, David P. 1987. Effects of burning on sedge meadow studied (Wisconsin). Restoration & Management Notes. 5(2): 90-91. [3821]
30. Marshall, William H.; Buell, Murray F. 1955. A study of the occurrence of amphibians in relation to a bog succession, Itasca State Park, Minnesota. Ecology. 36(3): 381-387. [16690]
31. Smith, D. W.; James, T. D. 1978. Characteristics of prescribed burns & resultant short-term environmental changes in Populus tremuloides woodland in southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Botany. 56: 1782-1791. [15114]
32. Jarman, Nancy M.; Dobberteen, Ross A.; Windmiller, Bryan; Lelito, Paul. 1991. Evaluation of created freshwater wetlands in Massachusetts. Restoration & Management Notes. 9(1): 26-29. [15414]
33. James, T. D. W.; Smith, D. W. 1977. Short-term effects of surface fire on the biomass and nutrient standing crop of Populus tremuloides in southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 7: 666-679. [6933]