Wetlands Ecology and Management

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 317–329

Wetland development in a previously mined landscape of East Texas, USA

Original Paper

Abstract

We studied wetland development in a chronosequence of created wetlands in a reclaimed landscape in east Texas seasonally for 1 year. The purpose of the study was to identify features (i.e., indicators) that best reflected changes in wetland ecosystem state through time and could serve as indicators of “maturity” for bond-release. Features considered included surface water nutrients, soil nutrients, soil redox potential, vegetative biomass and diversity, and benthic invertebrate biomass and diversity. Our sampling focused on nine wetlands representing three different-age classes (n = 3 for each) as a surrogate for time. All wetland sites were created with the same homogenized mine spoil and had similar hydrology and climate. Age-specific changes in all parameters were observed, except for surface water nutrients. The oldest wetlands (i.e., “mature”) exhibited highest soil concentrations of N, C, K, P, and Ca. Soil redox potential was significantly lower in the mature wetlands, in addition to within-wetland (lowest in deepest sampling zones) and intra-annual variability (i.e., lowest during the summer). Mature created wetlands supported the highest vegetative biomass and species richness and highest densities of invertebrates; however, taxa richness was similar across all age groups. Of all parameters we measured, vegetation metrics were among the simplest and most cost-effective measures used to track the early development of mitigated wetlands. This study provides the basis from which to track the development of these reclaimed ecosystems in a more rigorous and easily replicated manner. With further validation, select use of these parameter sets in east Texas and other similar landscapes could aid both in determining compliance for regulatory purposes as well as tracking success of ecological mitigation.

Keywords

Wetland creation Mitigation Reclamation Indicators Soil nutrients Redox potential Macrophytes Benthic invertebrates Trajectory 

References

  1. Alphin TD, Posey MH, Powell CM (1997) Plant and infaunal communities associated with a created marsh. Estuaries 20:42–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson CJ, Mitsch WJ (2006) Sediment, carbon, and nutrient accumulation at two 10-year-old created riverine marshes. Wetlands 26:779–792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson CJ, Mitsch WJ, Nairn RW (2005) Temporal and spatial development of surface soil conditions at two created riverine marshes. J Environ Qual 34:2072–2081PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bishel-Machung L, Brooks RP, Hoover KL, Yates SS (1996) Soil properties of reference wetlands and wetland creation projects in Pennsylvania. Wetlands 16:532–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Broome SW, Seneca ED, Woodhouse WW (1988) Tidal salt marsh restoration. Aquat Bot 32:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bruland GL, Richardson CJ (2006) Comparison of soil organic matter in created, restored and paired natural wetlands in North Carolina. Wetl Ecol Manag 3:245–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burton TM, Uzarski DG, Gathman JP, Genet JA, Keas BE, Stricker CA (1999) Development of a preliminary invertebrate index of biotic integrity for Lake Huron coastal wetlands. Wetlands 19(4):869–882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cammen LM (1976) Macroinvertebrate colonization of Spartina marshes artificially established on dredge spoil. Estuar Coast Mar Sci 4:357–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Covich AP, Palmer MA, Crowl TA (1999) The role of benthic invertebrate species in freshwater ecosystems. Bioscience 2:119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Craft CB (1997) Dynamics of nitrogen and phosphorus retention during wetland ecosystem succession. Wetl Ecol Manag 4:177–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Craft CB (2000) Co-development of wetland soils and benthic invertebrate communities following salt marsh creation. Wetl Ecol Manag 8:197–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Craft CB, Broome SW, Seneca ED (1988) Nitrogen, phosphorus and organic carbon pools in natural and transplanted marsh soils. Estuaries 11:272–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Craft CB, Broome SW, Seneca CB (1991) Porewater chemistry of natural and created marsh soils. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 152:187–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Euliss NH Jr, Mushet DM, Wrubleski DA (1999) Wetlands of the prairie pothole region: invertebrate species composition, ecology, and management. Invertebrates in freshwater wetlands of North America—Ecology and Management. Wiley, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  15. Faulkner SP, Patrick WH, Gambrell RP (1989) Field techniques for measuring wetland soil parameters. Soil Sci Soc Am J 53:883–890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fennessy MS, Rokosch A, Mack JJ (2008) Patterns of plant decomposition and nutrient cycling in natural and created wetlands. Wetlands 2:300–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gallagher ED, Jumars PA, Trueblood DD (1983) Facilitation of soft-bottom benthic succession by tube builders. Ecology 64:1200–1216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hart TM (2007) Ecological assessment of nine created wetlands at the Big Brown Mine, Fairfield, Texas, USA. M.Sc. Thesis submitted to the Department of Wildlife & Fisheries Sciences at Texas A&M University, College Station, TX. 56 pagesGoogle Scholar
  19. Hoeltje SM, Cole CA (2009) Comparison of function of created wetlands of two age classes in central Pennsylvania. Environ Manag 43:597–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Karr JR (1991) Biological integrity: a long-neglected aspect of water resources management. Ecol Appl 1:66–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kusler JA (1990) Views on scientific issues relation to restoration and creation of wetlands Issues in wetland protection. The Conservation Foundation, Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. Levin LA, Moy LD (1991) Are Spartina marshes a replaceable resource? A functional approach to evaluation of marsh creation efforts. Estuaries 14:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Matthews JW, Endress AG (2008) Performance criteria, compliance success, and vegetation development in compensatory mitigation wetlands. Environ Manag 41:130–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mehlich A (1978) New extractant for soil test evaluation of phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, calcium, sodium, manganese, and zinc. Communities Soil Sci Plant Anal 9:477–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mehlich A (1984) Mehlich-3 soil test extractant: a modification of Mehlich-2 extractant. Communities Soil Sci Plant Anal 15:1409–1416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Minello TJ, Zimmerman RJ, Medina R (1994) The importance of edge for natant macrofauna in a created salt marsh. Wetlands 14:184–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JG (2007) Wetlands, 4th edn. Wiley, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  28. Mitsch WJ, Wang N, Zhang L, Deal R, Wu X, Zuwerink A (2005) Using ecological indicators in a whole-system wetland experiment. In: Jorgensen SeE, Xu FL, Costanza R (eds) Handbook of ecological indicators for assessment of ecosystem health. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 213–237Google Scholar
  29. Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JG, Anderson CJ, Zhang L (2009) Wetland ecosystems. Wiley, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  30. Montagna PA, Kalke RD (1992) The effect of freshwater inflow on meiofaunal and macrofaunal Guadalupe and Nueces Estuaries, Texas. Estuaries 3:307–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Noon KF (1996) A model of created wetland primary succession. Landsc Urban Plan 34:97–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Odland A, del Moral R (2004) Thirteen years of wetland vegetation succession following a permanent drawdown, Myrkdalen Lake, Norway. Plant Ecol 2:185–198Google Scholar
  33. Olde Venterink H, Wassen MJ, Verkroost AWM, Ruiter CDe (2003) Species richness—productivity patterns differ between N-, P-, and K-limited wetlands. Ecology 8:2191–2199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Plafkin JL, Barbour MT, Porter KD, Gross SK, Hughes RM (1989) Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and rivers: benthic macroinvertebrates and fish. USEPA Washington, DC, USA. EPA 444/4-89-001Google Scholar
  35. Rhoades JD (1982) Agronomy. American Society of Agronomy, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  36. Sacco JN, Seneca ED, Wentworth T (1994) Infaunal community development of artificially established salt marshes in North Carolina. Estuaries 17:489–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schindler DW (1987) Detecting ecosystem responses to anthropogenic stress. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 44:6–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Shaffer PW, Ernst TL (1999) Distribution of soil organic matter in freshwater emergent/open water wetlands in the Portland, Oregon metropolitan area. Wetland 19:505–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stauffer AL, Brooks RP (1997) Plant and soil responses to salvaged marsh surface and organic matter amendments at a created wetland in central Pennsylvania. Wetlands 17:90–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stolt MH, Daniels WL, Genthner MH, Groover VA, Haering KC, Nagle S (2000) Comparison of soil and other environmental conditions in constructed and adjacent palustrine reference wetlands. Wetlands 20:671–683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sutton-Grier AE, Ho M, Richardson C (2009) Organic amendments improve soil conditions and denitrification in a restored riparian wetland. Wetlands 29:343–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Thomas CB, Mia S, Sindhøj E (2009) Environmental factors affecting temporal and spatial patterns of soil redox potential in Florida Everglades wetlands. Wetlands 29:1133–1145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tiner RW (1999) Wetland indicators: a guide to wetland identification, delineation, classification and mapping. CPR Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Turner RK, van den Bergh JCJM, Söderqvist T, Barendregt A, van der Straaten J, Maltby E, van Ierland EC (2000) Ecological-economic analysis of wetlands: scientific integration for management and policy. Ecol Econ 35:7–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. van der Valk AG, Pederson RL, Davis CB (2004) Restoration and creation of freshwater wetlands using seed banks. Wetl Ecol Manag 4:191–197Google Scholar
  46. Vespraskas MJ, Richardson JL, Tandarich TP, Teets SJ (1999) Dynamics of hydric soil formation across the edge of a created deep marsh. Wetlands 19:78–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. White JS, Bayley SE, Curtis PJ (1999) Sediment storage of phosphorus in a northern prairie wetland receiving municipal and agro-industrial wastewater. Ecol Eng 12:127–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zedler JB (2000) Progress in wetland restoration ecology. Trends Evol Ecol 14:402–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zedler JB, Callaway JC (1999) Tracking wetland restoration: do mitigation sites follow desired trajectories? Restor Ecol 7:69–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zimmer KD, Hanson MA, Butler MG (2000) Factors influencing invertebrate communities in prairie wetlands: a multivariate approach. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 57:76–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Wildlife and Fisheries SciencesTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  2. 2.Everglades FoundationPalmetto BayUSA

Personalised recommendations