Vegetation recovery after multiple-site experimental fen restorations

Biological Conservation

Volumn 147, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 60-67

  Hedberg, Petter ^a   Kotowski, Wiktor ^a   Saetre, Peter ^b   Mälson, Kalle ^c,d   Rydin, Håkan ^c   Sundberg, Sebastian ^c,e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW   (Poland)

^b SWEDISH NUCLEAR FUEL AND WASTE MANAGEMENT CO   (Sweden)

^c UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^d Uppsala County Administrative Board   (Sweden)

^e SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Ditch blocking; Fen restoration; Functional groups; Restoration; Rewetting; Tree removal

Indexed keywords

BRYOPHYTE; CLEARCUTTING; COMMUNITY RESPONSE; ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION; FEN; FUNCTIONAL GROUP; GRASS; LIGHT AVAILABILITY; PEATLAND; REMOVAL EXPERIMENT; REWETTING; SPECIES DIVERSITY; SPECIES RICHNESS; SUBSIDENCE; SUCCESSION; VASCULAR PLANT; VEGETATION COVER; VEGETATION DYNAMICS; WATER TABLE; WETLAND;

BRYOPHYTA; BRYOPHYTES; CAREX; POACEAE; SPHAGNUM; TRACHEOPHYTA;

EID: 84858153163     PISSN: 00063207     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2012.01.039     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Aapala K., Similä M., Haapalehto T. Research and monitoring support peatland restoration in Finland. Peatlands International 2009, 1(2009):26-31.
2. Almquist E. Flora Upsaliensis: Uppsalatraktens växter 1965, Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm, Sweden.
3. Armstrong W., Boatman D.J. Some field observations relating the growth of bog plants to conditions of soil aeration. Journal of Ecology 1967, 55:101-110.
4. Bray J.R., Curtis J.T. An ordination of the upland forest communities of Southern Wisconsin. Ecological Monographs 1957, 27:325-349.
5. Broll G., Merbach W., Pfeiffer E.M. Wetlands in Central Europe: Soil Organisms, Soil Ecological Processes and Trace Gas Emissions 2002, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, Germany.
6. Fojt W., Harding M. Thirty years of change in the vegetation communities of three valley mires in Suffolk, England. Journal of Applied Ecology 1995, 32:561-577.
7. Granath G., Strengbom J., Rydin H. Rapid ecosystem shifts in peatlands: linking plant physiology and succession. Ecology 2010, 91:3047-3056.
8. Gunnarsson, U., Löfroth, M., 2009. Våtmarksinventeringen - resultat från 25 års inventeringar [Results from the Swedish wetlands inventory]. Rapport 5925. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm, Sweden.
9. Haapalehto, T.O., Vasander, H., Jauhiainen, S., Tahvanainen, T., Kotiaho, J.S., 2011. The effects of peatland restoration on water-table depth, elemental concentrations, and vegetation: 10 years of changes. Restoration Ecology 19, 587-598.
10. Hallingbäck T., Hedenäs L., Weibull H. Ny checklista för Sveriges mossor. [New checklist of Swedish bryophytes]. Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift 2006, 100:96-148.
11. Hedberg P., Kotowski W. New nature by sowing? The current state of species introduction in grassland restoration, and the road ahead. Journal for Nature Conservation 2010, 18:304-308.
12. Jauhiainen S., Laiho R., Vasander H. Ecohydrological and vegetational changes in a restored bog and fen. Annales Botanici Fennici 2002, 39:185-199.
13. Klimkowska A., Kotowski W., van Diggelen R., Grootjans A.P., Dzierża P., Brzezińska K. Vegetation re-development after fen meadow restoration by topsoil removal and hay transfer. Restoration Ecology 2010, 18:924-933.
14. Klötzli F., Grootjans A.P. Restoration of natural and semi-natural wetland systems in central Europe: progress and predictability of developments. Restoration Ecology 2001, 9:209-219.
15. Kooijman A.M. The decrease of rich fen bryophytes in The Netherlands. Biological Conservation 1992, 59:139-143.
16. Kooijman A.M., Bakker C. Species replacement in the bryophyte layer in mires: the role of water type, nutrient supply and interspecific interactions. Journal of Ecology 1995, 83:1-8.
17. Kotowski W., van Diggelen R. Light as an environmental filter in fen vegetation. Journal of Vegetation Science 2004, 15:583-594.
18. Laine J., Vasander H., Laiho R. Long-term effects of water level drawdown on the vegetation of drained pine mires in southern Finland. Journal of Applied Ecology 1995, 32:785-802.
19. Laine A.M., Leppälä M., Tarvainen O., Päätalo M.-L., Seppänen R., Tolvanen A. Restoration of managed pine fens: effect on hydrology and vegetation. Applied Vegetation Science 2011, 14:340-349.
20. Lanta V., Mach J., Holcová V. The effect of dam construction on the restoration succession of spruce mires in the Giant Mountains (Czech Republic). Annales Botanici Fennici 2006, 43:260-268.
21. Littell R.C., Milliken G.A., Stroup W.W., Wolfinger R.D. SAS System for Mixed Models 2002, SAS Publishing, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.
22. Mälson K., Rydin H. The regeneration capabilities of bryophytes for rich fen restoration. Biological Conservation 2007, 135:435-442.
23. Mälson K., Backéus I., Rydin H. Long-term effects of drainage and initial effects of hydrological restoration on rich fen vegetation. Applied Vegetation Science 2008, 11:99-106.
24. Mälson K., Sundberg S., Rydin H. Peat disturbance, mowing, and ditch blocking as tools in rich fen restoration. Restoration Ecology 2010, 18:469-478.
25. Minkkinen K., Laine J. Long-term effect of forest drainage on the peat carbon stores of pine mires in Finland. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 1998, 28:1267-1275.
26. Mossberg, B., Stenberg, L., 2003. Den nya nordiska floran.Wahlström & Widstrand, Stockholm, Sweden.
27. Økland R.H. Rescaling of ecological gradients. II. The effect of scale on symmetry of species response curves. Nordic Journal of Botany 1986, 6:661-670.
28. Paavilainen E., Päivänen J. Peatland Forestry. Ecological Studies 1995, vol. 111. Springer, -Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg, Germany.
29. Paulissen M.P.C.P., van der Ven P.J.M., Dees A.J., Bobbink R. Differential effects of nitrate and ammonium on three fen bryophyte species in relation to pollutant nitrogen input. New Phytologist 2004, 164:451-458.
30. Rochefort L., Quinty F., Campeau S., Johnson K., Malterer T. North American approach to the restoration of Sphagnum dominated peatlands. Wetlands Ecology and Management 2003, 11:3-20.
31. Rydin H., Jeglum J.K. The Biology of Peatlands 2006, Oxford University Press.
32. Rydin H., Sjörs H., Löfroth M. Mires. Acta Phytogeographica Suecica 1999, 84:91-112.
33. Schipper L.A., McLeod M. Subsidence rates and carbon loss in peat soils following conversion to pasture in the Waikato Region, New Zealand. Soil Use and Management 2002, 18:91-93.
34. SMHI, 2005. Månadens väder; årets väder [Weather this month; weather this year]. Annual summary for 2005. Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute, Norrköping, Sweden.
35. Sundberg, S., 2006. Åtgärdsprogram för bevarande av rikkärr [Action plan for Swedish rich fens]. Rapport 5601. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm, Sweden.
36. Sundberg, S., in press. Quick target vegetation recovery after restorative shrub removal and mowing in a calcareous fen. Restoration Ecology. doi:10.1111/j.1526-100X.2011.00782.x.
37. Taylor K., Rowland A.P., Jones H.E. Molinia caerulea (L.) Moench. Journal of Ecology 2001, 89:126-144.
38. Turner B.L., Haygarth P.M. Phosphorus solubilization in rewetted soils. Nature 2001, 411:258.
39. van Diggelen R., Middleton B., Bakker J.P., Grootjans A.P., Wassen M. Fens and floodplains of the temperate zone: present status, threats, conservation and restoration. Applied Vegetation Science 2006, 9:157-162.
40. Vasander H., Tuittila E.-S., Lode E., Lundin L., Ilomets M., Sallantaus T., Heikkilä R., Pitkänen M.-L., Laine J. Status and restoration of peatlands in northern Europe. Wetlands Ecology and Management 2003, 51-63.
41. Vermeer J.G., Berendse F. The relationship between nutrient availability, shoot biomass and species richness in grassland and wetland communities. Plant Ecology 1983, 53:121-126.
42. von Krusenstjerna E. Bladmossvegetation och bladmossflora i Uppsalatrakten [Moss flora and moss vegetation around Uppsala]. Acta Phytogeographica Suecica 1945, 19:1-250.
43. Zak D., Wagner C., Payer B., Augustin J., Gelbrecht J. Phosphorus mobilization in rewetted fens: the effect of altered peat properties and implications for their restoration. Ecological Applications 2010, 20:1336-1349.