A comparison of plant communities in mitigation and reference wetlands in the mid-appalachians

Balcombe, Collin K.; Anderson, James T.; Fortney, Ronald H.; Rentch, James S.; Grafton, William N.; Kordek, Walter S.

doi:10.1672/0277-5212(2005)025[0130:acopci]2.0.co;2

Cited by 96 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In September and October of 2007, we collected four litter types (broadleaf cattail Typha latifolia L., common rush Juncus effusus L., brookside alder Alnus serrulata (Ait.) Willd., and reed canary grass Phalaris arundinacea L.) which were chosen because they are common, dominant wetland plant species in West Virginia (Balcombe et al 2005;Veselka IV 2008). Litter mixes can have non-additive decomposition rates compared to single species (Gartner & Cardon 2004), so a fifth litter type was created with a mixture (3:2:1) of reed canary grass, common rush, and brookside alder to approximate ratios of plant species present in the wetlands (Balcombe et al 2005).…”

Section: Decomposition Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of environmental parameters on litter decomposition in wetlands in West Virginia, USA

Gingerich

Merovich

Anderson

2014

Journal of Freshwater Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant litter decomposition varies by species and environmental conditions. To study environmental controls of decomposition, we measured plant litter decomposition rates in six wetlands located in West Virginia, USA. Four common wetland litter species were used: broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia L.), common rush (Juncus effusus L.), brookside alder (Alnus serrulata (Ait.) Willd.), and reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.). A fifth litter type was created from a mix of common rush, brookside alder, and reed canary grass. Litter bags were collected over two years, from December 2007 to December 2009, and environmental variables near litter bags were measured every two weeks. Nine environmental parameters and one study parameter were then used to construct and test the ability of 22 a-priori models to predict the decomposition rate of each litter type. The environmental variables that most influenced and, therefore, best predicted decomposition rate varied among litter types. Brookside alder decomposition rate was best predicted by soil temperature (ST), water pH (WPH), and the number of transitions between flooded and exposed conditions (FET); reed canary grass decomposition rate was best predicted by air temperature (AT), WPH, and ST; common rush decomposition rates were best predicted by AT; broadleaf cattail decomposition rate was best predicted by hydroperiod (HP) and FET; and the mixed litter decomposition rate was best predicted by AT and WPH. Overall, AT, ST, and WPH were directly related to decomposition rate, while HP was inversely related. The FET was directly related to decomposition rates of common rush and broadleaf cattail and inversely related to the decomposition rate of brookside alder. The study of litter decomposition helps reveal the link between environmental conditions and wetland function.

show abstract

Section: Decomposition Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of environmental parameters on litter decomposition in wetlands in West Virginia, USA

Gingerich

Merovich

Anderson

2014

Journal of Freshwater Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Short-term observations are not sufficient in predicting community dynamics (Collinge and Ray, 2009;Mesléard et al, 1991;Weiher et al, 1996). An initial success may be compromised by long-term mortality, undesired successional trajectories, and does not reflect long-term success (Dawe et al, 2000;Fahselt, 2007), although long-term studies confirm a beneficial role of soil transfer in wetland restoration (Balcombe et al, 2005;Nishihiro et al, 2006;Reinartz and Warne, 1993). Long-term monitoring of changes in plant communities of restored wetlands is required to evaluate the potential of this technique for restoring or creating Mediterranean temporary wetlands.…”

Section: > Restoration Perspectives and The Importance Of Time And Momentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is often used in wetland restoration and has already shown promising results: the imported soils contribute considerably to species richness and native wetland species establishment, indicating that soil transfer may enhance the success of wetland restoration projects compared to natural colonization (e.g. Balcombe et al, 2005;Nishihiro et al 2006;Reinartz and Warne, 1993). Moreover, this technique could be the most efficient method for transferring a large number of temporary wetland plant species that have a short life cycle but can produce large quantities of seeds and rapidly form a large seed bank (Mouronval and Baudoin, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporary wetland restoration after rice cultivation: is soil transfer required for aquatic plant colonization?

Muller

Buisson

Mouronval

et al. 2013

Knowl. Managt. Aquatic Ecosyst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key-words:former ricefield, restoration, spontaneous colonization, soil transfer, temporary wetland Mediterranean temporary wetlands have considerably declined in recent decades. Today, opportunities arise for the restoration of these wetlands due to land-use changes, such as the abandonment of cultivation. One critical question is whether communities, such as those observed in natural temporary wetlands, can develop alone or if active restoration should be implemented. In a series of experimental mesocosms, we transferred soil from several temporary wetlands chosen as a set of reference ecosystems. Four months after soil transfer, vegetation in transfer mesocosms was compared to that derived from spontaneous colonization (control mesocoms). Transfer mesocosms are colonized by all target hydrophyte species transferred with the soil and the resulting communities are similar to those of reference ecosystems. They also have fewer non-target species than the control mesocosms. Even though the study period was not sufficient to draw any definitive conclusion regarding the utility of forced dispersion by soil transfer, the preliminary results are promising for an application on a larger scale. RÉSUMÉRestauration d'un milieu humide temporaire après culture du riz : le transfert de sol est-il nécessaire à la recolonisation des plantes aquatiques ? Mots-clés :anciennes rizières, restauration, colonisation spontanée, transfert de sol, zone humide Les marais temporaires méditerranéens ont vu leur superficie se réduire considé-rablement au cours des dernières décennies. Aujourd'hui, des opportunités apparaissent pour la restauration de ces zones humides, en particulier à partir d'espaces agricoles abandonnés. L'une des questions majeures est alors de savoir si les communautés telles que l'on peut les observer dans les marais temporaires naturels peuvent se développer seules ou si une restauration active doit être mise en place. Dans un ensemble de mésocosmes expérimentaux, nous avons transféré du sol provenant de plusieurs marais temporaires choisis comme un ensemble d'écosystèmes de référence. Quatre mois après le transfert de sol, la végétation des mésocosmes transférés a été comparée à celle issue uniquement de la colonisation spontanée (témoins). Les mésocosmes ayant subi un transfert de sol sont colonisés par la totalité des hydrophytes cibles transférées par le sol et présentent des communautés similaires à celles des écosystèmes de référence. Ils présentent d'autre part moins d'espèces jugées indésirables que les mésocosmes témoins. Même si la durée de l'étude ne nous permet pas de conclure définitivement sur la nécessité d'opérer un forçage de dispersion par transfert de sol, ces résultats préliminaires sont prometteurs pour une application à plus large échelle.

show abstract

“…Balcombe et al [30] and Spieles [31] reported that mitigation wetlands may take years or even decades to mature. Weaver et al [32] also indicated that very low variance in the FAMEs within the constructed wetland after 1 year operation, and reached a greater temporal stability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Purification efficiencies and microbial community structure of integrated vertical-flow constructed wetland for domestic wastewater treatment during acclimation period

Su-qing

Chang

Dai

et al. 2012

Desalination and Water Treatment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comparison of plant communities in mitigation and reference wetlands in the mid-appalachians

Cited by 96 publications

References 48 publications

Influence of environmental parameters on litter decomposition in wetlands in West Virginia, USA

Influence of environmental parameters on litter decomposition in wetlands in West Virginia, USA

Temporary wetland restoration after rice cultivation: is soil transfer required for aquatic plant colonization?

Purification efficiencies and microbial community structure of integrated vertical-flow constructed wetland for domestic wastewater treatment during acclimation period

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About