Conservation Evidence strives to be as useful to conservationists as possible. Please take our survey to help the team improve our resource.

Providing evidence to improve practice

Individual study: Comparison of vegetation and CO2 dynamics between a restored cut-away peatland and a pristine fen: evaluation of the restoration success

Published source details

Soini P., Riutta T., Yli-Petäys M. & Vasander H. (2010) Comparison of vegetation and CO2 dynamics between a restored cut-away peatland and a pristine fen: evaluation of the restoration success. Restoration Ecology, 6, 894-903


This study is summarised as evidence for the intervention(s) shown on the right. The icon shows which synopsis it is relevant to.

Rewet peatland (raise water table) Peatland Conservation

A site comparison study in 2004 in two peatlands in Finland (Soini et al. 2010) reported that a rewetted peatland developed a different plant community to a pristine peatland, with lower plant species richness, lower shrub cover and greater sedge/cottongrass cover (but similar forb and moss cover). Most of these results were not tested for statistical significance. After 10 years, the overall plant community composition differed between the rewetted and pristine peatland (data reported as a graphical analysis and similarity index). The rewetted peatland contained only 15 plant species (vs 18 in the pristine peatland) and 5 species/60 x 60 cm quadrat (vs 9 species). In the rewetted peatland there were no dwarf shrubs (vs 3% cover in the pristine peatland) but sedge/cottongrass cover was 20% (vs 4%). Both peatlands had similar forb cover (5 vs 5%) and Sphagnum moss cover (84 vs 90%), and there was no significant difference in total moss cover (89 vs 90%). In 2004, cover of every plant species was recorded in 15 quadrats, each approximately 60 x 60 cm. Nine quadrats were in a historically mined peatland, rewetted in 1994 (water table 9 cm above peat surface during summer). Six quadrats were in a nearby pristine peatland with similar physical conditions (but a lower water table: 6 cm below surface). This study used the same rewetted peatland as (2).

(Summarised by Nigel Taylor)