Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Loss of Plant Biodiversity Over a Seven-Year Period in Two Constructed Wetlands in Central New York

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Since wetland construction projects are becoming more commonplace, meaningful follow-up studies are needed to evaluate how these systems change over time. To that end, the objective of our study was to examine the temporal changes in plant community composition and water chemistry in two constructed wetlands. We investigated two wetland sites that were constructed in 2003 in northern Otsego County, NY, a county that is largely dominated by agriculture. Site 1 was previously an active cow pasture and site 2 was previously a wet meadow surrounded by agricultural fields. No active plant introduction was made during the construction; however, both sites were located in areas with many remnant wetlands and were connected to through-flowing streams. In 2004 (Year 1) and 2010 (Year 7), the plant community composition and nitrogen retention were assessed. We found that both sites experienced site-wide declines in plant species richness, including the loss of upland and facultative upland species and the unanticipated loss of facultative wetland and some obligate species. We propose that high water levels, which, at their maximum depth were >1.5 m deeper than in Year 1, maintained by landowners in the years after the initial survey, may have been responsible for the unexpected loss of wetland species. We also found that site 1 exhibited considerable nitrogen retention in both Year 1 and Year 7; however, N concentrations were low at site 2 in both years.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  • APHA, AWWA, WPCF (1992) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. American Public Health Association, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Balcombe C, Anderson J, Fortney R, Rentch J, Grafton W, Kordek W (2005) A comparison of plant communities in mitigation and reference wetlands in the Mid-Appalachians. Wetlands 25:130–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown SC, Veneman PLM (2001) Effectiveness of compensatory wetland mitigation in Massachusetts, USA. Wetlands 21:508–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell DA, Cole CA, Brooks RP (2002) A comparison of created and natural wetlands in Pennsylvania, USA. Wetl Ecol Manag 10:41–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casanova MT, Brock MA (2000) How do depth, duration and frequency of flooding influence the establishment of wetland plant communities? Plant Ecol 147:237–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole CA, Brooks RP (2000) A comparison of the hydrologic characteristics of natural and created mainstem floodplain wetlands in Pennsylvania. Ecol Eng 14:221–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole CA, Shafer D (2002) Section 404 wetland mitigation and permit success criteria in Pennsylvania, USA, 1986–1999. Environ Manag 30:508–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole C, Urban C, Russo P, Murray J, Hoyt D, Brooks R (2006) Comparison of the long-term water levels of created and natural reference wetlands in northern New York, USA. Ecol Eng 27:166–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD (2001) PAST: paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaenotol Electron 4:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoeltje S, Cole C (2009) Comparison of function of created wetlands of two age classes in central Pennsylvania. Environ Manag 43:597–608

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hooper DU, Vitousek PM (1997) The effects of plant composition and diversity on ecosystem processes. Science 277:1302–1305

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hutcheson K (1970) A test for comparing diversities based on the Shannon formula. J Theor Biol 29:151–154

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis WMJ (2001) Wetlands explained: wetland science, policy, and politics in America. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews JW, Endress AG (2008) Performance criteria, compliance success, and vegetation development in compensatory mitigation wetlands. Environ Manag 41:130–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JG (2007) Wetlands. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch WJ, Wilson RF (1996) Improving the success of wetland creation and restoration with know-how, time, and self-design. Ecolog Appl 6:77–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno-Mateos D, Power ME, Comın FA, Yockteng R (2012) Structural and functional loss in restored wetland ecosystems. PLoS Biol 10:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naeem S, Thompson LJ, Lawler SP, Lawton JH, Woodfin RM (1994) Declining biodiversity can alter the performance of ecosystems. Nature 368:734–737

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naeem S, Knops JMH, Tilman D, Howe KM, Kennedy T, Gale S (2000) Plant diversity increases resistance to invasion in the absence of covarying extrinsic factors. Oikos 91:97–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parikh A, Gale N (1998) Vegetation monitoring on created dune swale wetlands, Vandenberg air force base, California. Restor Ecol 6:83–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poulin M, Andersen R, Rochefort L (2012) A new approach for tracking vegetation change after restoration: a case study with peatlands. Restor Ecol. doi:10.1111/j.1526-100X.2012.00889.x

    Google Scholar 

  • Seabloom EW, van der Valk AG (2003) Plant diversity, composition, and invasion of restored and natural prairie pothole wetlands: implications for restoration. Wetlands 23:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siemann E, Tilman D, Haarstad J, Ritchie M (1998) Experimental tests of the dependence of arthropod diversity on plant diversity. Am Nat 152:738–750

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Spieles DJ (2005) Vegetation development in created, restored, and enhanced mitigation banks of the United States. Wetlands 25:51–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tews J, Brose U, Grimm V, Tielborger K, Wichmann MC, Schwager M, Jeltsch F (2004) Animal species diversity driven by habitat heterogeneity/diversity: the importance of keystone structures. J Biogeogr 31:79–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D (1996) Biodiversity: population versus ecosystem stability. Ecology 77:350–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D, Lehman CL, Thomson KT (1997) Plant diversity and ecosystem productivity: theoretical considerations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:1857–1861

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • US Army Corps of Engineers (1996) National list of vascular plant species that occur in wetlands: 1996 national summary. Washington

  • US Department of Agriculture (2011) The plants database, national plant data team, Greensboro, NC 27401-4901 USA, National Plant Data Center. http://plants.usda.gov

  • Weiher E, Wisheu IC, Keddy PA, Moore DRJ (1996) Establishment, persistence, and management implications of experimental wetland plant communities. Wetlands 16:208–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox DA, Nichols SJ (2008) The effects of water-level fluctuations on vegetation in a lake Huron wetland. Wetlands 28:487–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zar J (1999) Biostatistical analysis. In: Ryu T, Snavely SL (eds), Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

  • Zhang T and Zhu W (2005) Nitrogen pollution from the upper Susquehanna river watersheds: effects of land use. In Zhu W, Minami K, Xing G (eds) Proceedings of the 3rd International Nitrogen Conference. Science Press USA, New York p 440–449

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Marley Urdanick, Keith Murphy, Rebecca Heintzman, Megan Larson-Liebner, Meaghan Petix, Dr. John Titus, and Dr. Julian Shepherd for their invaluable assistance with the vegetation survey. Critical comments from reviewers and the editors have helped to improve the quality and the clarity of the paper. This study was supported in part by the initial ACE mandate of wetland survey post-construction, and an EPA watershed Grant (EPA-R3CBP-09) subcontracted to Binghamton University through the Upper Susquehanna Coalition. The views presented in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views of ACE or EPA.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miranda A. Kearney.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 118 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kearney, M.A., Fickbohm, S. & Zhu, W. Loss of Plant Biodiversity Over a Seven-Year Period in Two Constructed Wetlands in Central New York. Environmental Management 51, 1067–1076 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-013-0035-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-013-0035-7

Keywords