4.1 Article

An experimental study on the response of blanket bog vegetation and water tables to ditch blocking

Journal

WETLANDS ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
Volume 25, Issue 6, Pages 703-716

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11273-017-9545-z

Keywords

Blanket peatland; Re-wetting; Vegetation response; Cotton grass (Eriophorum vaginatum); Sphagnum; Hydrological response

Funding

  1. UK Government's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) [SP1202]
  2. Countryside Council for Wales (now part of Natural Resources Wales)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We studied the effect of ditch blocking on vegetation composition and water-table depths in a blanket peatland. Measurements were made for a period of four years (water tables) and five years (vegetation) in the inter-ditch areas of three experimental treatments: (i) open ditches, (ii) ditches blocked with closely-spaced dams and (iii) ditches partially infilled with peat and blocked with dams. It is often assumed that ditch blocking will lead to an increase in the abundance of Sphagnum and, potentially, a reduction in the abundance of sedges, particularly the cotton grasses. However, our data show no treatment effects on the abundance of either group. We did find an effect of time, with the abundance of both sedges and Sphagnum spp. varying significantly between some years. For the sedges there was no systematic change over time, while for the Sphagnum spp. abundance tended to increase through the study period. This systematic change was not related to a measure of the vigour of the sedges, although vigour was lower towards the end of the study compared to the beginning. Our vegetation data are consistent with our water-table data. As with plant type abundance, we did not find any statistically significant differences in water-table depths between treatments, both for annual averages and summer averages. We comment on why ditch blocking does not seem to have affected water tables and vegetation composition at our study site.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available