Introduce tree/shrub seeds or propagules: freshwater wetlands

Overall effectiveness category Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)
Number of studies: 2
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

40%
Certainty

30%
Harms

0%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

This action involves introducing seeds or propagules of emergent plants to restore/create marshes or swamps. “Propagules” is the term used to describe the seed-like, usually leafless structures produced by mangrove trees to allow them to reproduce and disperse. Seeds or propagules may be collected from plants in greenhouses/laboratories, or from natural sites. They may be sown directly into the soil, scattered over the surface, or carried to suitable sites by water (e.g. after dropping them into the sea during an incoming tide).

Introduction of target vegetation might be useful in severely degraded or bare sites – which may lack remnant plants or seed banks to kick start revegetation with desirable species, and may be at risk of being taken over by undesirable species (Brown & Bedford 1997). It might also be useful in isolated wetlands, far from sources of marsh or swamp plant propagules. Seeds and propagules are easier to handle than plants, and can be a cost-effective way to introduce vegetation to large areas – but they can be more susceptible to herbivory or being washed away (e.g. Schoenholz et al. 2001).

The effects of sowing may be highly dependent on the environmental conditions in each study. Questions you might ask when interpreting the evidence include: Is the study site degraded? Where and when were seeds/propagules introduced? Was there any intervention to improve conditions before planting? What were the conditions over the duration of the study?

The scope of this action does not include sowing nurse plants; sowing submerged or floating plants; sowing to restore bogs, fens, fen meadows or peat swamp forests (see Taylor et al. 2018); or sowing facultative wetland plants in upland sites. In contrast, the scope does include sowing non-native species to conserve marshes or swamps – whilst acknowledging that this is often considered ethically unacceptable due to the risk of invasion (e.g. Ren et al. 2009).

^{Brown S.C. & Bedford B.L. (1997) Restoration of wetland vegetation with transplanted wetland soil: an experimental study. Wetlands, 17, 424–437.}

^{Ren H., Lu H., Shen W., Huang C., Guo Q., Li Z. & Jian S. (2009) Sonneratia apetala Buch.Ham in the mangrove ecosystems of China: an invasive species or restoration species? Ecological Engineering, 35, 1243–1248.}

^{Schoenholz S.H., James J.P., Kaminski R.M., Leopold B.D. & Ezell A.W. (2001) Afforestation of bottomland hardwoods in the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley: status and trends. Wetlands, 21, 602–613.}

^{Taylor N.G., Grillas P. & Sutherland W.J. (2018) Peatland Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions to Conserve Peatland Vegetation. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge.}

Study locations

Key messages

Two studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of introducing seeds or propagules of trees/shrubs to freshwater wetlands. One study was in Australia and one study was in the USA.

VEGETATION COMMUNITY

VEGETATION ABUNDANCE

Tree/shrub abundance (1 study): One study in a floodplain swamp clearing in the USA simply reported the number of tree seedlings present within three years of sowing tree seeds. There were no seedlings of two of the five sown species.

VEGETATION STRUCTURE

OTHER

Germination/emergence (1 study): One replicated study in Australia reported 0–18% germination of tree/shrub seeds sown into a wet meadow, depending on the species and whether vegetation was cleared before sowing.
Survival (1 study): The same study reported 0% survival, after 8 months, of seedlings that had germinated from sown tree/shrub seeds.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A replicated study in 1995 in a wet meadow in New South Wales, Australia (de Jong 2000) reported 0–18% germination of sown tree/shrub seeds after two months, depending on the species and whether vegetation was cleared before sowing, but 0% survival after eight months. In plots that had been cleared of vegetation before sowing, all five sown species germinated. The number of seedlings present after two months was 1–18% of the number of seeds sown. In plots that had not been cleared of vegetation, only two of five species germinated. For these species, the number of seedlings present after two months was ≤1% of the number of seeds sown. After eight months, after prolonged saturation or flooding, no seedlings were present in any plot. Methods: In January–February 1995, seeds of five tree/shrub species present in local wetlands were sown on to a wet meadow, with the aim of restoring a swamp. For each species, three hundred 25 x 25 cm plots were sown with approximately 50 seeds. Of the 300 plots, 200 were cleared of vegetation before sowing. Half of the plots/species were higher (and drier) than the others. Seedlings of the planted species were counted in every plot after two and eight months.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
de J.N.H. (2000) Woody plant restoration and natural regeneration in wet meadow at Coomonderry Swamp on the south coast of New South Wales. Marine and Freshwater Research, 51, 81.
A study in 2006–2009 in a floodplain swamp restoration site in Wisconsin, USA (Thomsen et al. 2012) reported that seedlings of only three of five sown tree species were present. Neither black ash Fraxinus nigra nor river birch Betula nigra seedlings were present in the site within three years of sowing seeds. Seedlings of the other three sown species were present (green ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica, American elm Ulmus americana and silver maple Acer saccharinum; abundance data reported graphically) but the study does not distinguish seedlings originating from sown vs naturally arriving seeds. Methods: Between November 2006 and May 2009, seeds of five tree species (numbers not clearly reported) were broadcast across 16 plots in a floodplain swamp restoration site (a clearing created by a storm). All plots had been cleared of invasive reed canarygrass Phalaris arundinacea and disked in November 2006 (before first sowing). Herbicide was then applied regularly through to November 2008). Tree seedlings were counted in August 2007–2009.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Thomsen M., Brownell K., Groshek M. & Kirsch E. (2012) Control of reed canarygrass promotes wetland herb and tree seedling establishment in an Upper Mississippi River floodplain forest. Wetlands, 32, 543-555.

Please cite as:

Taylor N.G., Grillas P., Smith R.K. & Sutherland W.J. (2021) Marsh and Swamp Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions to Conserve Marsh and Swamp Vegetation. Conservation Evidence Series Synopses. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Marsh and Swamp Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Transplant or replace wetland soil: freshwater swamps Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Introduce tree/shrub seeds or propagules: brackish/saline wetlands Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	19	Synopsis Link
Directly plant trees/shrubs: freshwater wetlands Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	17	Synopsis Link