Effects on groundwater storage of restoring, constructing or draining wetlands in temperate and boreal climates: a systematic review.

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC ACS Applied Electronic Materials Pub Date : 2022-12-08 DOI:10.1186/s13750-022-00289-5
Arvid Bring, Josefin Thorslund, Lars Rosén, Karin Tonderski, Charlotte Åberg, Ida Envall, Hjalmar Laudon
{"title":"Effects on groundwater storage of restoring, constructing or draining wetlands in temperate and boreal climates: a systematic review.","authors":"Arvid Bring, Josefin Thorslund, Lars Rosén, Karin Tonderski, Charlotte Åberg, Ida Envall, Hjalmar Laudon","doi":"10.1186/s13750-022-00289-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Drainage activities have caused widespread wetland loss, groundwater drawdown and impairment of ecosystem services. There are now several national programs for wetland restoration, primarily focused on reintroducing ecosystem services such as habitats and nutrient retention. In Sweden, recent dry summers have also reinforced interest in hydrological functions such as the potential for enhanced groundwater storage, both in and around the wetland. However, there are several knowledge gaps regarding groundwater storage effects of restoration, including if they extend beyond the wetland and how they vary with local conditions. Therefore, we have systematically reviewed groundwater storage effects from the interventions of restoring, constructing or draining boreo-temperate wetlands. Drainage was included primarily to evaluate to what degree restoration can reverse drainage effects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched 8 databases for scientific journal publications in English, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, French, German and Polish. Gray literature was searched in English and Swedish. Articles were included based on their relevance for Swedish conditions, i.e., in previously glaciated areas with boreal or temperate climate. Extracted outcome data were groundwater level changes, along with other variables including type of wetland and intervention and, when reported, distance between sampling point and intervention. Meta-analyses were conducted separately for studies that reported groundwater levels at different distances and studies that reported overall effects. Included studies were subject to critical appraisal to evaluate their susceptibility to bias, primarily selection bias, performance bias, and detection bias. Critical appraisal results were used in sensitivity analysis.</p><p><strong>Review findings: </strong>Out of 11,288 screened records, 224 articles fulfilled the criteria, and from these, 146 studies were included in meta-analysis. Most studies (89%) investigated peatlands, primarily from Finland, the UK and Canada. Restoration and drainage studies were equally common. Only nine studies reported measurements beyond the wetland area. Our synthesis is therefore primarily focused on effects within wetlands. In peatland restoration, the observed groundwater level rise decreased exponentially with distance from the restored ditch and was reduced to 50% after 9 [95% confidence interval: 5, 26] m. Drainage reached somewhat farther, with 50% of the groundwater drawdown remaining at 21 [11, 64] m. On average, restoration increased groundwater levels by 22 [16, 28] cm near the intervention, whereas drainage caused a drawdown of 19 [10, 27] cm. Assuming that sampling was unbiased, effects were similar for bogs, fens and mires. Restricting the meta-analysis to the 58% of studies that were of high validity did not alter conclusions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Effects of peatland restoration and drainage were of similar magnitudes but opposite directions. This indicates that, on average, rewetting of drained peatlands can be expected to restore groundwater levels near the ditch. However, restoration may not reach all the area affected by drainage, and there was a strong dependence on local context. For managers of wetland projects, it is thus important to follow up and monitor restoration effects and reinforce the intervention if necessary. Our results also point to a need for better impact evaluation if increased storage beyond the restored wetland area is desired.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11378806/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-022-00289-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Drainage activities have caused widespread wetland loss, groundwater drawdown and impairment of ecosystem services. There are now several national programs for wetland restoration, primarily focused on reintroducing ecosystem services such as habitats and nutrient retention. In Sweden, recent dry summers have also reinforced interest in hydrological functions such as the potential for enhanced groundwater storage, both in and around the wetland. However, there are several knowledge gaps regarding groundwater storage effects of restoration, including if they extend beyond the wetland and how they vary with local conditions. Therefore, we have systematically reviewed groundwater storage effects from the interventions of restoring, constructing or draining boreo-temperate wetlands. Drainage was included primarily to evaluate to what degree restoration can reverse drainage effects.

Methods: We searched 8 databases for scientific journal publications in English, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, French, German and Polish. Gray literature was searched in English and Swedish. Articles were included based on their relevance for Swedish conditions, i.e., in previously glaciated areas with boreal or temperate climate. Extracted outcome data were groundwater level changes, along with other variables including type of wetland and intervention and, when reported, distance between sampling point and intervention. Meta-analyses were conducted separately for studies that reported groundwater levels at different distances and studies that reported overall effects. Included studies were subject to critical appraisal to evaluate their susceptibility to bias, primarily selection bias, performance bias, and detection bias. Critical appraisal results were used in sensitivity analysis.

Review findings: Out of 11,288 screened records, 224 articles fulfilled the criteria, and from these, 146 studies were included in meta-analysis. Most studies (89%) investigated peatlands, primarily from Finland, the UK and Canada. Restoration and drainage studies were equally common. Only nine studies reported measurements beyond the wetland area. Our synthesis is therefore primarily focused on effects within wetlands. In peatland restoration, the observed groundwater level rise decreased exponentially with distance from the restored ditch and was reduced to 50% after 9 [95% confidence interval: 5, 26] m. Drainage reached somewhat farther, with 50% of the groundwater drawdown remaining at 21 [11, 64] m. On average, restoration increased groundwater levels by 22 [16, 28] cm near the intervention, whereas drainage caused a drawdown of 19 [10, 27] cm. Assuming that sampling was unbiased, effects were similar for bogs, fens and mires. Restricting the meta-analysis to the 58% of studies that were of high validity did not alter conclusions.

Conclusions: Effects of peatland restoration and drainage were of similar magnitudes but opposite directions. This indicates that, on average, rewetting of drained peatlands can be expected to restore groundwater levels near the ditch. However, restoration may not reach all the area affected by drainage, and there was a strong dependence on local context. For managers of wetland projects, it is thus important to follow up and monitor restoration effects and reinforce the intervention if necessary. Our results also point to a need for better impact evaluation if increased storage beyond the restored wetland area is desired.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
温带和寒带气候下湿地恢复、建设和排水对地下水储量的影响
背景:排水活动造成了大面积的湿地丧失、地下水减少以及生态系统服务功能受损。目前有多个国家湿地恢复计划,主要侧重于重新提供生态系统服务,如栖息地和养分保持。在瑞典,最近的干旱夏季也增强了人们对水文功能的兴趣,例如湿地内部和周围的地下水储存潜力。然而,关于湿地恢复对地下水储存的影响,包括这些影响是否会延伸到湿地之外,以及这些影响如何随当地条件而变化,还存在一些知识空白。因此,我们对恢复、建造或排水北温带湿地的干预措施所产生的地下水储存效果进行了系统性评估。将排水纳入其中主要是为了评估恢复在多大程度上可以扭转排水效应:我们在 8 个数据库中搜索了英语、瑞典语、挪威语、丹麦语、法语、德语和波兰语的科学期刊出版物。我们还搜索了英文和瑞典文的灰色文献。文章的收录基于其与瑞典情况的相关性,即以前冰川地区的北方或温带气候。提取的结果数据为地下水位的变化,以及其他变量,包括湿地类型和干预措施,以及取样点与干预措施之间的距离(如有报告)。对报告不同距离地下水位的研究和报告总体效果的研究分别进行了元分析。对纳入的研究进行批判性评价,以评估其是否容易出现偏差,主要是选择偏差、绩效偏差和检测偏差。批判性评估结果用于敏感性分析:在 11,288 条筛选记录中,有 224 篇文章符合标准,其中 146 项研究被纳入荟萃分析。大多数研究(89%)对泥炭地进行了调查,主要来自芬兰、英国和加拿大。恢复和排水研究同样常见。只有九项研究报告了湿地区域以外的测量结果。因此,我们的综述主要侧重于湿地内部的影响。在泥炭地恢复过程中,观察到的地下水位上升随距离恢复沟渠的距离呈指数下降,在 9 [95% 置信区间:5,26] 米后下降至 50%。假设取样无偏差,则沼泽、沼泽地和沼泽地的影响相似。将荟萃分析限制在 58% 的有效性较高的研究中不会改变结论:泥炭地恢复和排水的影响大小相似,但方向相反。这表明,平均而言,排水泥炭地的复湿可望恢复沟渠附近的地下水位。不过,恢复工作可能无法覆盖所有受排水影响的地区,这与当地的具体情况有很大关系。因此,对于湿地项目的管理者来说,必须对恢复效果进行跟踪和监测,并在必要时加强干预措施。我们的研究结果还表明,如果希望在恢复的湿地区域之外增加蓄水量,就需要更好地进行影响评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
期刊最新文献
Hyperbaric oxygen treatment promotes tendon-bone interface healing in a rabbit model of rotator cuff tears. Oxygen-ozone therapy for myocardial ischemic stroke and cardiovascular disorders. Comparative study on the anti-inflammatory and protective effects of different oxygen therapy regimens on lipopolysaccharide-induced acute lung injury in mice. Heme oxygenase/carbon monoxide system and development of the heart. Hyperbaric oxygen for moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury: outcomes 5-8 years after injury.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1