Study

Plant species diversity in restored and created Delmarva Bay wetlands

  • Published source details Russell K.N. & Beauchamp V.B. (2017) Plant species diversity in restored and created Delmarva Bay wetlands. Wetlands, 37, 1119-1133.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Create mounds or hollows before planting trees/shrubs: freshwater wetlands

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation

Restore/create freshwater marshes or swamps (multiple actions)

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Create mounds or hollows before planting trees/shrubs: freshwater wetlands

    A replicated, site comparison study in 2013 of eight 10-year-old restored/created freshwater wetlands in Maryland, USA (Russell & Beauchamp 2017) found that adding coarse woody debris to wetlands before planting trees/shrubs generally had no significant effect on plant community composition, richness or diversity – but did affect the ground layer community composition. The amount of coarse woody debris added to wetlands (none, low density, high density) was not significantly related to plant community composition, richness or diversity. This was true for both the ground vegetation layer (<1 m tall) and the tree layer (>1 m tall; data not reported). However, the effect on community composition was also analyzed for wetlands with vs without added coarse woody debris. In this analysis, ground layer community composition significantly differed between treatments (data reported as a graphical analysis). Methods: In June–August 2013, vegetation was surveyed along transects in eight restored/created depressional wetlands (4–6 transects/wetland, extending from the centre to the surrounding upland). The wetlands had been restored or created on farmland in 2003–2004, by: rewetting, adding wheat/barley straw, and planting trees/shrubs in wetland and upland areas. Logs, from trees felled on site, were added to pools/pool margins in six of the wetlands (three low density: 15–50 logs/ha; three high density: 136–333 logs/ha).

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

  2. Restore/create freshwater marshes or swamps (multiple actions)

    A replicated study in 2013 of eight 10-year-old restored/created freshwater wetlands in Maryland, USA (Russell & Beauchamp 2017) reported that they contained a total of 134 plant species, including 65 wetland-characteristic species. There were 45–78 species/wetland in the ground layer (<1 m tall) and 4–10 species/wetland in the tree layer (woody species >1 m tall). The study also noted that several environmental characteristics were related to plant diversity and/or community composition (e.g. wetland size, slope, water regime, soil fertility; see original paper for details). Methods: In June–August 2013, vegetation was surveyed along transects in eight restored/created depressional wetlands (4–6 transects/wetland, extending from the centre to the surrounding upland). The wetlands had been restored (one) or created (seven) on farmland in 2003–2004, by: removing drainage tiles/plugging ditches; adding coarse woody debris; adding wheat/barley straw; and planting trees/shrubs around the margins of the flooded centre and in the surrounding uplands.

    (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 21

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 ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust