|1.||Relation of light, temperature, hardness, etc., to aquatic plant distribution. These environmental studies should be undertaken if possible with controlled conditions. When general rules are arrived at they should be compared with field results.|
|2.||Relation of sedimentation to the rooted aquatic plant. The factors of sedimentation and plant succession are closely related as dynamic processes, and in each region, where lakes occur, there is need for careful observations. A fuller understanding of the sediments, their origin, structure, and effect upon the lake waters is needed before a great deal can be accomplished in plant succession. One of the most pertinent problems is a better understanding of the organic sediments.|
|3.||Histological and Morphological studies. Much can be accomplished in the field of ecological anatomy and morphology that may explain the distribution and tolerances of aquatic plants. Those species of definite value to fish and game should have further studies made of their reproduction. Histological studies should be made in relation to the physiological experiments.|
|4.||Critical taxonomic studies. Studies of this nature are important for every region where hydrophytes occur. There should be close correlation between these studies and ecological observations, for there are not only important taxonomic questions to solve, but the presence of certain species, varieties, and forms of rooted hydrophytes within lakes is often indicative of very specific conditions. Taxonomy will become one of the ecologist's most important tools, if use is made of the terms, species, varieties, and forms and there is an understanding of the environments in which they occur.|
|5.||Productivity studies. The pursuit of productivity studies is important because they are closely related to the other fields of limnological investigation both scientific and applied.|
|6.||Relation of aquatic plants to animals.
Many phases present themselves for investigation when the relations of animal life
to plants are considered and only a few can
be suggested here:|
BAKER F. C. 1918. The Productivity of Invertebrate Fish Food on the Bottom of Oneida Lake. Tech. Pub. No. 9, AT. Y. State Coll. Forestry.
BROWN W. H. 1911. The Plant Life of Ellis, Great, Little, and Long Lakes in North Carolina. Contrib. U. S. Nat. Herb., 13: 323.
FASSETT N. C. 1930. The Plants of Some Northeastern Wisconsin Lakes. Trans. Wis. Acad. Sci., 25: 157.
FROHNE W. C. 1938. Contribution to Knowledge of the Limnological Role of the Higher Aquatic Plants. Papers Mich. Acad. Sci.
GATES F. C. 1926. Plant Succession about Douglas Lake, Cheboygan County, Michigan. Bot. Gaz., 82: 170.