Study

Plant diversity, composition, and invasion of restored and natural prairie pothole wetlands: implications for restoration

  • Published source details Seabloom E.W. & Valk A.G. (2003) Plant diversity, composition, and invasion of restored and natural prairie pothole wetlands: implications for restoration. Wetlands, 23, 1-12.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Raise water level to restore/create freshwater marshes from other land uses

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Raise water level to restore/create freshwater marshes from other land uses

    A replicated, site comparison study in 1993–1994 of 27 prairie pothole marshes in Iowa, USA (Seabloom & van der Valk 2003) found that restored potholes (rewetted and planted with cover crops) had lower vegetation cover and species richness than natural potholes, and were characterized by a different set of species. After 5–7 years, restored potholes had lower overall vegetation cover than natural potholes (see original paper for data and statistical model). Restored potholes also contained fewer plant species: overall (restored: 19; natural: 29 species/pothole) and per quadrat (restored: 3.2; natural: 4.8 species/m2). Finally, restored potholes contained a different plant community to natural potholes (statistical significance not assessed). Of 47 analyzed species, 23 were significantly more common in natural potholes whilst only eight were significantly more common in restored potholes (data reported as statistical model results). Methods: In 1993 or 1994, vegetation was surveyed in 27 prairie potholes. Seventeen potholes had been restored from farmland 5–7 years previously, by breaking/blocking drainage systems, and planting cover crops “along the margins of several sites”. Ten potholes were natural (never drained). Plant species and cover were recorded in 11–42 quadrats, each 1 m2, across each pothole. Note that the study evaluates the combined effect of rewetting and planting cover crops in some potholes. This study used a subset of the restored potholes from (4), and used some of the potholes from (7) and (8).

    (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