Study

Using functional trajectories to track constructed salt marsh development in the Great Bay Estuary, Maine/New Hampshire, U.S.A.

  • Published source details Morgan P.A. & Short F.T. (2002) Using functional trajectories to track constructed salt marsh development in the Great Bay Estuary, Maine/New Hampshire, U.S.A.. Restoration Ecology, 10, 461-473.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Restore/create brackish/saline marshes or swamps (specific action unclear)

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Restore/create brackish/saline marshes or swamps (specific action unclear)

    A replicated, site comparison study of 17 estuarine salt marshes in the northeast USA (Morgan & Short 2002) found that created marshes contained a different plant community, fewer plant species and less plant biomass than nearby natural marshes, on average – but reported that the oldest created marsh was similar to the natural marshes. The created marshes were 1–14 years old. They typically had a different overall plant community composition to natural marshes (data reported as a graphical analysis; statistical significance not assessed) with less overall cover of high marsh species (created: 0–37%; natural: 1–84%). On average, the created marshes contained less above-ground plant biomass (160 g/m2; vs natural: 350) and fewer plant species (4.4 species/marsh; vs natural: 8.4), although average plant diversity did not significantly differ between created and natural marshes (data reported as a diversity index). However, the oldest created marsh was similar to the natural marshes. This was true for overall community composition, cover of high marsh species (37%), biomass (310 g/m2) and richness (9.1 species/marsh). Methods: In an unspecified year, vegetation was surveyed in six created salt marshes and 11 nearby natural marshes in similar physical environments. Creation involved planting, but the study does not report details of this or prior earthworks. Plant species and their cover were surveyed in 1-m2 quadrats. Live vegetation was cut from 0.5-m2 quadrats, then dried and weighed.

    (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