Sarah C. Crosby, David M. Hudson, A. Randall Hughes, Anna Bartholet, Kasey T. Burns, Mary K. Donato, Devan S. Healy, Rebha Raviraj, Katherine Sperry, Nicole C. Spiller, Justin Susarchick
{"title":"Structure and Function of Restored and Natural Salt Marshes: Implications for Ecosystem Resilience and Adaptive Potential","authors":"Sarah C. Crosby, David M. Hudson, A. Randall Hughes, Anna Bartholet, Kasey T. Burns, Mary K. Donato, Devan S. Healy, Rebha Raviraj, Katherine Sperry, Nicole C. Spiller, Justin Susarchick","doi":"10.1007/s12237-024-01395-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Salt marshes have ecological and economic value, but shoreline development, the increasing rate of sea-level rise, and other human impacts have caused significant loss of salt marshes. As a result, restoration of these ecosystems is widespread. For restoration and management to be effective, it is imperative to improve our understanding of marsh-building plants that serve as the ecological foundation of these habitats. Given the observed differences in characteristics between populations of smooth cordgrass, <i>Spartina alterniflora</i>, restoration plantings may impact the biodiversity and resilience of restored ecosystems. Understanding differences in the structural and functional outcomes of active planting of restoration sites will enable the long-term success of restoration efforts to be improved. Natural and restored salt marshes in Long Island Sound were studied in 2021–2022 for <i>S. alterniflora</i> genetics, biomass, stem morphology, and faunal community composition. The average genotypic diversity of <i>S. alterniflora</i> was more than 4 times higher in restored than in natural marshes, and differentiation between each restored site and natural sites decreased with time. No difference was observed in live <i>S. alterniflora</i> belowground biomass; however, mean dead belowground biomass in natural marshes was more than 3 times greater than in restored marshes. Marsh platform invertebrates differed between the restored and natural sites, with natural marsh edge habitats having 9 times higher density of <i>Geukensia demissa</i> and 3 times as many crab burrows than in restored marshes, but there was no detected difference in species richness or abundance of nekton at high tide. With restoration practitioners seeking resilient, self-sustaining ecosystems, it is important to evaluate whether restored marsh characteristics are consistent with those goals and modify restoration planning accordingly to incorporate genetics, structure, and function.</p>","PeriodicalId":11921,"journal":{"name":"Estuaries and Coasts","volume":"161 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Estuaries and Coasts","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12237-024-01395-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Salt marshes have ecological and economic value, but shoreline development, the increasing rate of sea-level rise, and other human impacts have caused significant loss of salt marshes. As a result, restoration of these ecosystems is widespread. For restoration and management to be effective, it is imperative to improve our understanding of marsh-building plants that serve as the ecological foundation of these habitats. Given the observed differences in characteristics between populations of smooth cordgrass, Spartina alterniflora, restoration plantings may impact the biodiversity and resilience of restored ecosystems. Understanding differences in the structural and functional outcomes of active planting of restoration sites will enable the long-term success of restoration efforts to be improved. Natural and restored salt marshes in Long Island Sound were studied in 2021–2022 for S. alterniflora genetics, biomass, stem morphology, and faunal community composition. The average genotypic diversity of S. alterniflora was more than 4 times higher in restored than in natural marshes, and differentiation between each restored site and natural sites decreased with time. No difference was observed in live S. alterniflora belowground biomass; however, mean dead belowground biomass in natural marshes was more than 3 times greater than in restored marshes. Marsh platform invertebrates differed between the restored and natural sites, with natural marsh edge habitats having 9 times higher density of Geukensia demissa and 3 times as many crab burrows than in restored marshes, but there was no detected difference in species richness or abundance of nekton at high tide. With restoration practitioners seeking resilient, self-sustaining ecosystems, it is important to evaluate whether restored marsh characteristics are consistent with those goals and modify restoration planning accordingly to incorporate genetics, structure, and function.
期刊介绍:
Estuaries and Coasts is the journal of the Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation (CERF). Begun in 1977 as Chesapeake Science, the journal has gradually expanded its scope and circulation. Today, the journal publishes scholarly manuscripts on estuarine and near coastal ecosystems at the interface between the land and the sea where there are tidal fluctuations or sea water is diluted by fresh water. The interface is broadly defined to include estuaries and nearshore coastal waters including lagoons, wetlands, tidal fresh water, shores and beaches, but not the continental shelf. The journal covers research on physical, chemical, geological or biological processes, as well as applications to management of estuaries and coasts. The journal publishes original research findings, reviews and perspectives, techniques, comments, and management applications. Estuaries and Coasts will consider properly carried out studies that present inconclusive findings or document a failed replication of previously published work. Submissions that are primarily descriptive, strongly place-based, or only report on development of models or new methods without detailing their applications fall outside the scope of the journal.