4.3 Article

Creating Temporary Pools as Wetland Mitigation: How Well Do They Function?

Journal

WETLANDS
Volume 36, Issue 2, Pages 335-345

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s13157-016-0742-y

Keywords

Created wetlands; Pool-breeding amphibians; Macroinvertebrates; Temporary pools; Vernal pools; Wetland mitigation

Funding

  1. Siena College Committee on Teaching and Faculty Development Summer Research Fellowship
  2. National Science Foundation [DGE-1122492]
  3. Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies
  4. Yale Institute for Biospheric Studies

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Temporary forested pools are an important ecological resource throughout northern and eastern North America, yet they are often destroyed or degraded. Pool creation offers a potential mitigation solution, but long-term monitoring to assess the functioning of created pools is scarce. Furthermore, studies rarely integrate multiple, interacting levels of the pool ecosystem, including physical, chemical, and biological parameters. To address this knowledge gap, we compared the physical habitat, water chemistry, productivity, and community composition of macroinvertebrates and amphibians from 7-year old created pools (n = 7) to reference pools (n = 6). Created pools were smaller in size, received more sunlight, had greater amounts of Lemna, Typha, and Phragmites, and were less likely to dry. Created pools had higher pH and conductivity, but algal biomass did not differ. Macroinvertebrate richness was similar across pools, but composition starkly differed. Amphibian species richness and composition was similar between created and reference pools; however, created pools had fewer focal pool-breeding amphibians, including the spotted salamander and wood frog. By assessing the entire pool ecosystem, we found that the ability of created pools to mimic the physical conditions and ecological functions of natural temporary pools is suspect.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available