Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Candidate Soil Indicators for Monitoring the Progress of Constructed Wetlands Toward a Natural State: A Statistical Approach

  • Article
  • Published:
Wetlands Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A persistent question among ecologists and environmental managers is whether constructed wetlands are structurally or functionally equivalent to naturally occurring wetlands. We examined 19 variables collected from 10 constructed and nine natural emergent wetlands in Ohio, USA. Our primary objective was to identify candidate indicators of wetland class (natural or constructed), based on measurements of soil properties and an index of vegetation integrity, that can be used to track the progress of constructed wetlands toward a natural state. The method of nearest shrunken centroids was used to find a subset of variables that would serve as the best classifiers of wetland class, and error rate was calculated using a five-fold cross-validation procedure. The shrunken differences of percent total organic carbon (% TOC) and percent dry weight of the soil exhibited the greatest distances from the overall centroid. Classification based on these two variables yielded a misclassification rate of 11 % based on cross-validation. Our results indicate that % TOC and percent dry weight can be used as candidate indicators of the status of emergent, constructed wetlands in Ohio and for assessing the performance of mitigation. The method of nearest shrunken centroids has excellent potential for further applications in ecology.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson CB, Martínez Pastur G, Lencinas VM, Wallems PK, Moorman MC, Rosemond AD (2009) Do introduced North American beavers Castor canadensis engineer differently in southern South America? An overview with implications for restoration. Mammal Review 39:33–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballantine K, Schneider R (2009) Fifty-five years of soil development in restored freshwater depressional soils. Ecological Applications 19:1467–1480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bishel-Machung L, Brooks RP, Yates SS, Hoover KL (1996) Soil properties of reference wetlands and wetland creation projects in Pennsylvania. Wetlands 16:532–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black CA (ed) (1965) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. Chemical and microbiological properties, 2nd edn. American Academy of Soil Science, Madison, pp 771–1572

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinson MM (1993) A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station. Wetlands Research Program Technical Report WRP-DE-4. Vicksburg, MS

  • Bruland GL, Richardson CJ, Daniels WL (2009) Microbial and geochemical responses to organic matter amendments in a created wetland. Wetlands 29:1153–1165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapin FS, Zavaleta ES, Eviner VT, Naylor RL, Vitousek PM, Reynolds HL, Hooper DU, Lavorel S, Sala OE, Hobbie SE, Mack MC, Diaz S (2000) Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature 405:234–242

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cole CA, Brooks RP, Heller Wardrop D (2001) Assessing the relationship between biomass and soil organic matter in created wetlands of central Pennsylvania, USA. Ecological Engineering 17:2001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craft C (2000) Co-development of wetland soils and benthic invertebrate communities following salt marsh creation. Wetlands Ecology and Management 8:197–207

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl TE (1990) Wetlands losses in the United States, 1780s to 1980s. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl TE, Johnson CE (1991) Wetlands status and trends in the conterminous United States, mid-1970s to mid-1980s. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Dettling M (2004) BagBoosting for tumor classification with gene expression data. Bioinformatics 20:3583–3593

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Environmental Laboratory (1987) Corps of engineers wetlands delineation manual. Wetlands Research Program Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS

  • Farnham IM, Singh AK, Stetzenbach KJ, Johannesson KH (2002) Treatment of nondetects in multivariate analysis of groundwater geochemistry data. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 60:265–281

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fennessy MS, Mack JJ, Rokosch A, Knapp M, Micacchion M (2004) Integrated wetland assessment program. Part 5: biogeochemical and hydrological investigations of natural and mitigation wetlands. Ohio EPA Technical Report WET/2004-5. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Wetlands Ecology Unit, Division of Surface Water, Columbus, OH. http://www.epa.ohio.gov/portals/35/wetlands/Part5_Mitigation_Study.pdf Accessed June 2013

  • Fernandez L, Karp L (1998) Restoring wetlands through mitigation banks. Environmental and Resource Economics 12:323–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs JP (1993) Importance of small wetlands for the persistence of local populations of wetland-associated animals. Wetlands 13:25–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs JP (2000) Wetland loss and biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology 14:314–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gower JC (1974) Maximal predictive classification. Biometrics 30:643–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gwin SE, Kentula ME (1990) Evaluating design and verifying compliance of wetlands created under section 404 of the Clean Water Act in Oregon. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR, USA. http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1957/6415/Stephanie_Gwin_ocr.pdf?sequence=1 Accessed June 2013

  • Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J (2001) The elements of statistical learning; data mining, inference, and prediction. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Narasimhan B, Chu G (2009) pamr: prediction analysis for microarrays. R package version 1.33. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=pamr. Accessed June 2013

  • Ingram LJ, Schuman GE, Stahl PD, Spackman LK (2005) Microbial respiration and organic carbon indicate nutrient cycling recovery in reclaimed soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal 69:1737–1745

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston CA (2001) Wetland soil and landscape alteration by beavers. In: Richardson JL, Vepraskas MJ (eds) Wetland soils: genesis, hydrology, landscape and classification. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, pp 391–408

    Google Scholar 

  • Kocovsky PM, Adams JV, Bronte CR (2009) The effect of sample size on the stability of principal component analysis of truss-based fish morphometrics. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 138:487–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mack JJ (2004a) Integrated wetland assessment program, part 4: a Vegetation Index of Biotic Integrity (VIBI) for Ohio Wetlands. Ohio EPA technical report WET/2004-4. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Wetland Ecology Group, Division of Surface Water, Columbus, OH. http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/wetlands/WetlandEcologySection_reports.aspx Accessed June 2013

  • Mack JJ (2004b) Integrated wetland assessment program, part 9: field manual for the vegetation index of biotic integrity for wetlands v. 1.3. Ohio EPA Technical Report WET/2004-9. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Wetland Ecology Group, Division of Surface Water, Columbus, OH, USA. http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/wetlands/WetlandEcologySection_reports.aspx Accessed June 2013

  • Mack JJ, Micacchion M (2006) An ecological assessment of Ohio mitigation banks: vegetation, amphibians, hydrology and soils. Ohio EPA technical report WET/2006- 1. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Surface Water, Wetland Ecology Group, Columbus, OH, USA. http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/wetlands/WetlandBankReport.aspx. Accessed June 2013

  • Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JG (2000) Wetlands, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch WJ, Wu X, Nairn RW, Weihe PE, Wang N, Boucher CE (1998) Creating and restoring wetlands: a whole-ecosystem experiment in self design. Bioscience 48:1019–1030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC) (2000) Ecological indicators for the nation. National Academy Press, Inc, Washington, D.C

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC) (2001) Compensating for wetland losses under the clean water act, 1st edn. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson D, Sommers L (1982) Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter. In: Page A, Miller R, Keeney D (eds) Methods of soil analysis, part 2. American Society of Agronomy, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, pp 539–580

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss RF, LaRoe ET III, Scott JM (1995) Endangered ecosystems of the United States: a preliminary assessment of loss and degradation. National Biological Service Biological Report 28. http://biology.cos.ucf.edu/files/spice_lab_publication_26.pdf. Accessed June 2013

  • Pimm SL, Raven P (2000) Biodiversity ─ extinction by numbers. Nature 403:843–845

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2009) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org. Accessed June 2013

  • Race MS, Fonseca MS (1996) Fixing compensatory mitigation: what will it take? Ecological Applications 6:94–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reddy KR, DeLaune RD (2008) Biogeochemistry of wetlands. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reed PB (1988) National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: national summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88(24). http://www.fws.gov/pacific/ecoservices/habcon/pdf/National%20List%20of%20Plant%20Species%201988.pdf Accessed June 2013

  • Schumacher BA (2002) Methods for the determination of total organic carbon in soils and sediments. US Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Sciences Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Las Vegas, NV. NCEA-C-1282, EMASC-001. http://www.epa.gov/esd/cmb/research/papers/bs116.pdf Accessed June 2013

  • Semlitsch RD, Bodie JR (1998) Are small, isolated wetlands expendable? Conservation Biology 12:1129–1133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer PW, Ernst TL (1999) Distribution of soil organic matter in freshwater emergent/open water wetlands in the Portland, Oregon metropolitan area. Wetlands 19:505–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheldrick BH, Wang C (1993) Particle size distribution. In: Carter MR (ed) Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Lewis Publications, Boca Raton, pp 499–511

    Google Scholar 

  • Stapanian MA, Sundberg SD, Baumgardner GA, Liston A (1998) Alien plant species composition and associations with anthropogenic disturbance in North American forests. Plant Ecology 139:49–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stapanian MA, Bur MT, Adams JV (2007) Temporal trends of young-of-year fishes in Lake Erie and comparison of diel sampling periods. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 129:169–178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stauffer AL, Brooks RP (1997) Plant and soil responses to salvaged marsh surface and organic matter amendments at a created wetland in central Pennsylvania. Wetlands 17:90–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stolt MH, Genthner MH, Daniels WL, Groover VA, Nagle S, Harling KC (2000) Comparison of soil and other environmental conditions in constructed and adjacent palustrine reference wetlands. Wetlands 20:671–683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TDI-Brooks International (2009) Analytical services: General Services Administrative (GSA) pricing. Effective 01 January through 31 December 2009. http://www.tdi-bi.com/analytical_services/gsa/GSA%20Price%20List%202009.pdf Accessed June 2013

  • Tibshirani R, Hastie T, Narasimhan B, Chu G (2002) Diagnosis of multiple cancer types by shrunken centroids of gene expression. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99:6567–6572

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tibshirani R, Hastie T, Narasimhan B, Chu G (2003) Class prediction by nearest shrunken centroids, with application to DNA microarrays. Statistical Science 18:104–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS) (2010) Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States: a guide for identifying and delineating hydric soils, version 7.0, 2010. ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NSSC/Hydric_Soils/FieldIndicators_v7.pdf Accessed June 2013

  • U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2008) Compensatory mitigation for losses of aquatic resources; final rule. 33 CFR Parts 325 and 332

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) (1983) Methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes. EPA 600/4-79-020

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) (1994) Methods for the determination of metals in environmental samples, EPA 600/R-94-111, Supplement I. [to EPA/600-4-91-010]

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) (2004) Method 9045D. Revision 4. www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/9045d.pdf Accessed June 2013

  • Vitousek PM, Mooney HA, Lubchenco J, Melillo JM (1997) Human domination of Earth’s ecosystems. Science 277:494–499

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zedler JB (1996) Ecological issues in wetland mitigation: an introduction to the forum. Ecological Applications 6:33–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zedler JB (2000) Progress in wetland restoration. Tree 15:402–407

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zedler JB, Langis R (1991) Authenticity: comparisons of constructed and natural salt marshes of San Diego Bay. Ecological Restoration 9:21–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Zedler JB, Callaway JC, Sullivan G (2001) Declining biodiversity: why species matter and how their functions might be restored in California tidal marshes. Bioscience 51:1005–1017

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

D. Bennion provided technical assistance. B. Gara and J. Gilbert reviewed earlier drafts of this paper. Use of trade, product, or firm name does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. This article is Contribution Number 1764 of the Great Lakes Science Center.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin A. Stapanian.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stapanian, M.A., Adams, J.V., Fennessy, M.S. et al. Candidate Soil Indicators for Monitoring the Progress of Constructed Wetlands Toward a Natural State: A Statistical Approach. Wetlands 33, 1083–1094 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-013-0464-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-013-0464-3

Keywords

Navigation