Hydrologic, edaphic, and vegetative responses to microtopographic reestablishment in a restored wetland
-
Published source details
Bruland G. & Richardson C. (2005) Hydrologic, edaphic, and vegetative responses to microtopographic reestablishment in a restored wetland. Restoration Ecology, 13, 515-523.
Published source details Bruland G. & Richardson C. (2005) Hydrologic, edaphic, and vegetative responses to microtopographic reestablishment in a restored wetland. Restoration Ecology, 13, 515-523.
Actions
This study is summarised as evidence for the following.
| Action | Category | |
|---|---|---|
|
Restore/create freshwater marshes or swamps (multiple actions) Action Link |
 |
-
Restore/create freshwater marshes or swamps (multiple actions)
A study in 2000–2003 of a freshwater swamp restoration site on former cropland in North Carolina, USA (Bruland & Richardson 2005) reported that following multiple interventions, nineteen plant species colonized the created hummocks, hollows and flats within two years. Of these, 15 were wetland species and six were wetland-characteristic species. Eighteen species occurred on only one landform: either on raised hummocks, low hollows or the flats in-between. Flats had a higher plant species richness (5.0 species/m2) than hollows (3.5 species/m2) or hummocks (1.9 species/m2). Hollows supported a higher plant biomass (1,390 g/m2) than flats (900 g/m2) or hummocks (290 g/m2). Methods: In winter 2000/2001, a 37-ha agricultural field was subjected to multiple restoration interventions: stripping the topsoil; reprofiling the surface into hummocks (1 m tall; 1.5 m diameter), hollows (30 cm deep; 20–40 m2) and flats; blocking ditches to raise the water table; replacing the topsoil; and planting tree seedlings in the hollows and flats (1,680 seedlings/ha). In October 2003, herbaceous vegetation was surveyed in eighteen 5-m2 plots (six plots/landform). Above-ground biomass was cut from one 50-cm diameter subplot/plot, then dried and weighed.
(Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)
)_2023.JPG)
