Study

Salvaged-wetland soil as a technique to improve aquatic vegetation at created wetlands in Wyoming, USA

  • Published source details McKinstry M.C. & Anderson S.H. (2005) Salvaged-wetland soil as a technique to improve aquatic vegetation at created wetlands in Wyoming, USA. Wetlands Ecology and Management, 13, 499-508.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Reprofile/relandscape: freshwater marshes

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation

Transplant or replace wetland soil: freshwater marshes

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Reprofile/relandscape: freshwater marshes

    A replicated study in 1999–2001 of six excavated wetlands in Wyoming, USA (McKinstry & Anderson 2005) reported that no plants grew in the wetlands within two years of excavation. Methods: In late 1999, six wetlands were excavated (area: 0.25–1 ha; depth: <3 m) in bentonite clay soils. None of these marshes were amended with wetland soils (cf. Section 12.26). In September 2000 and 2001, forty 0.25-m2 quadrats/wetland were surveyed for vegetation. Quadrats were placed along transects perpendicular to the shoreline, so had variable water depths.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

  2. Transplant or replace wetland soil: freshwater marshes

    A replicated, controlled study in 1999–2001 of 12 excavated wetlands in Wyoming, USA (McKinstry & Anderson 2005) found that wetlands amended with marsh soil developed vegetation cover, whilst unamended wetlands did not. Amended wetlands contained three plant species after one year and eight plant species after two years. Of 40 quadrats surveyed in each amended wetland, 3–6 contained vegetation after one year and 1–22 contained vegetation after two years. At this point, plant biomass was mostly alkali bulrush Scirpus maritimus (142g; 51% of total) or cattails Typha spp. (96g; 34% of total). No plants were recorded in unamended wetlands. Methods: In late 1999, twelve wetlands (<1 ha each) were excavated in clay soils. A 10–15 cm thick layer of soil from a nearby marsh was spread around the edge of six wetlands (water depth: 0–100 cm). The other six wetlands did not receive soil. In September 2000 and 2001, all vegetation was collected from forty 0.25-m2 quadrats/wetland then identified, dried and weighed. Quadrats were placed along transects perpendicular to the shoreline.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

Output references
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