Study

Floristic quality assessment for marshes in Alberta's northern prairie and boreal regions

  • Published source details Wilson M.J., Forrest A.S. & Bayley S.E. (2013) Floristic quality assessment for marshes in Alberta's northern prairie and boreal regions. Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management , 16, 288-299

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Restore/create brackish/saline marshes or swamps (specific action unclear)

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation

Restore/create freshwater marshes or swamps (specific action unclear)

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Restore/create brackish/saline marshes or swamps (specific action unclear)

    A replicated, paired, site comparison study in 2007–2011 of 133 fresh and brackish wetlands in Alberta, Canada (Wilson et al. 2013) found that restored/created wetlands typically contained higher quality wet meadow vegetation than natural wetlands. All data were reported as a floristic quality index, with higher quality vegetation containing species more characteristic of undisturbed wet meadows in the study area, and a greater proportion of native to non-native species. In six of eight comparisons, the quality of wet meadow vegetation was lower in restored/created wetlands than natural wetlands. This was true for wetlands restored on historically mined land (whether still affected by pollution or not) and for “improved” stormwater ponds (with attempts to make them more like natural wetlands using interventions such as reprofiling, adding wetland soil and planting). In the final two comparisons, the quality of wet meadow vegetation was similar in wetlands restored on farmland and in natural wetlands. Methods: Between 2007 and 2011, plant species were recorded in the wet meadow zone of 133 wetlands (six 1-m2 quadrats/wetland). There were 47 restored or created wetlands (≥ 3 years old) and 86 naturally occurring wetlands (some surrounded mostly by forest, some mostly by agriculture) across two distinct regions. The study does not report full details of restoration/creation methods, or separate results for brackish and fresh wetlands.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

  2. Restore/create freshwater marshes or swamps (specific action unclear)

    A replicated, paired, site comparison study in 2007–2011 of 133 fresh and brackish wetlands in Alberta, Canada (Wilson et al. 2013) found that restored/created wetlands typically contained lower quality wet meadow vegetation than natural wetlands. All data were reported as a floristic quality index, with higher quality vegetation containing species more characteristic of undisturbed wet meadows in the study area, and a greater proportion of native species. In six of eight comparisons, vegetation in restored/created wetlands was of lower quality than in natural wetlands. This was true for wetlands restored on historically mined land (including some still affected by pollution) and for “improved” stormwater ponds (with attempts to make them more like natural wetlands using interventions such as reprofiling, adding wetland soil and planting). In the final two comparisons, vegetation in wetlands restored on farmland contained was of similar quality to vegetation in natural wetlands. Methods: Between 2007 and 2011, plant species were recorded in the wet meadow zone of 133 wetlands (six 1-m2 quadrats/wetland). There were 47 restored or created wetlands (≥ 3 years old) and 86 naturally occurring wetlands (some surrounded mostly by forest, some mostly by agriculture) across two distinct regions. The study does not report full details of restoration/creation methods, or separate results for fresh and brackish wetlands.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

Output references

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, terrestrial 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 18

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 Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust