Disturb soil/sediment surface before planting non-woody plants: brackish/saline wetlands

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    not assessed
  • Certainty
    not assessed
  • Harms
    not assessed

Study locations

Key messages

  • Two studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of disturbing the surface of brackish/saline wetlands before planting emergent, non-woody plants. Both studies were in the USA.

VEGETATION COMMUNITY

 

VEGETATION ABUNDANCE

  • Individual plant abundance (1 study): One study quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species. The replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a salt marsh in the USA found that tilling sediment before planting California cordgrass Spartina foliosa had no significant effect on its biomass or density after two growing seasons, but did reduce its biomass after one growing season.

VEGETATION STRUCTURE

  • Height (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a salt marsh in the USA found that tilling sediment before planting California cordgrass Spartina foliosa had no significant effect on its height after 1–2 growing seasons.
  • Individual plant size (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study on estuarine sediment in the USA found that the average size of planted salt marsh plants was similar, after 1–2 years, in tilled and untilled plots. Size was reported as an index incorporating plant height and lateral extent.

OTHER

  • Survival (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study on estuarine sediment in the USA found that survival rates of planted salt marsh plants were similar, over 1–2 years, in tilled and untilled plots.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in 1990–1991 in a recently excavated estuarine salt marsh in California, USA (Gibson et al. 1994) found that tilling plots before planting California cordgrass Spartina foliosa had no significant effect on cordgrass biomass, stem density or plant height after two growing seasons. At this time, there was no significant difference between treatments in above-ground cordgrass biomass (tilled: 100 g/m2; untilled: 220 g/m2), cordgrass density (tilled: 30 stems/m2; untilled: 50 stems/m2) or average cordgrass height (data not reported). The same was true for density and height after one growing season, whilst cordgrass biomass was significantly lower in tilled plots (30 g/m2) than untilled plots (60 g/m2). Methods: In February 1990, four pairs of 5-m2 plots were prepared alongside a tidal creek in a recently excavated salt marsh. In each pair, one random plot was tilled to 15 cm depth. The other plots were left undisturbed. In March 1990, each plot was planted with cordgrass plants from ten 4-L pots. California cordgrass stems were counted and measured until October 1991. Dry biomass was estimated from heights.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in 2000–2002 in an estuary in California, USA (O’Brien & Zedler 2006) found that tilling plots before planting salt marsh plants typically had no significant effect on their survival or size. Over the first year after initial planting, dead plants were replaced by stock plants of a similar age. The number of replacements needed was statistically similar in tilled plots (9.1 replacements/plot) and undisturbed plots (9.7 replacements/plot). Over the second year of the study, the treatments supported a similar average number of surviving plants (tilled: 2.9; undisturbed: 2.8 survivors/plot) and a similar survival rate under each treatment for five of five planted species (tilled: 31–72%; undisturbed: 19–86%). Across both years, surviving plants were typically a similar size in tilled and undisturbed plots (data reported as an index combining height and lateral extent). This was true in four of four comparisons of the average size of plants per plot, and 9 of 10 comparisons of the average size of individual species. Methods: In January 2000, seventy-two 2.24-m2 plots were established (in 6 sets of 12) on intertidal sediment excavated earlier that winter. Half of the plots (six random plots/set) were rototilled to 30 cm depth. The other plots were left undisturbed. In December 2000, five greenhouse-reared plants (each a different species) were planted into each plot. Colonizing vegetation was removed until October 2001. Dead planted vegetation was replaced until December 2001 to maintain 36 plants/species/soil treatment. Survival, height and lateral spread of planted vegetation were recorded in August 2002.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Taylor N.G., Grillas P., Smith R.K. & Sutherland W.J. (2021) Marsh and Swamp Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions to Conserve Marsh and Swamp Vegetation. Conservation Evidence Series Synopses. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Marsh and Swamp Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Marsh and Swamp Conservation
Marsh and Swamp Conservation

Marsh and Swamp Conservation - Published 2021

Marsh and Swamp Synopsis

What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust