Plant community composition as a function of geochemistry and hydrology in three Appalachian wetlands

Abstract

Appalachian mountain wetlands are uncommon and diverse ecosystems; however, they are often susceptible to extensive alteration or destruction due to coal mining, highway construction, and quarrying. This study aimed to determine vegetation composition at three pristine wetlands and establish relationships with previously reported hydrologic, edaphic, and porewater characteristics to provide baseline data that could enhance wetland mitigation or restoration projects. Herbaceous vegetation was assessed by visually estimating percent cover for bryophyte and vascular species and by determining stem density for vascular taxa using 1 m2 quadrats located along transects. Multiple response permutation procedures (MRPPs) based upon importance values confirmed that species composition differed significantly (P < 0·001) among the sites. Nonmetric multi‐dimensional scaling (NMDS) indicated that soil moisture conditions during the fall, soil chemistry, and porewater chemical composition influenced plant community composition. The first wetland (Martins Fork) was primarily dominated by Osmunda cinnamomea, Osmunda regalis, and Sphagnum palustre in response to drier soil during the fall season, higher soil pH, and weakly minerotrophic soil and porewater. The second wetland (Kentenia) was overwhelmingly dominated by S. palustre due to lower soil pH and persistently high water levels. Vegetation at the third wetland (Four Level) was distinguished by strongly dominant Scirpus polyphyllus and Glyceria striata and responded to higher soil and porewater Ca, Mg, and P concentrations as well as a light intensity gradient. The diverse vegetation and physico‐chemical characteristics indicate that these sites, although small in size, support regional biodiversity and are potential reference wetlands. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Veratrum parviflorum: An Underexplored Source for Bioactive Steroidal Alkaloids

“…The stem is slender and 2 to 5 feet tall [15,17]. A pseudostem is formed by the overlapping sheaths of the leaves, which are broad (2-4 inches wide), petiolate, obscurely plicate, and have a blue tint adaxially [7,16,18]. The tepals are pale green to olive green, narrowly rhombic oblanceolate, with entire margins, gradually attenuated at base, filaments adnate, gland bilobed, diffuse, and dark (Figure 2) [7].…”

“…V. parviflorum is found in the southeastern regions of North America [15][16][17][18]20]. This species grows in rich deciduous forests (800-2030 m) in the mid-Appalachians, including parts of Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia [15,16].…”

“…This species grows in rich deciduous forests (800-2030 m) in the mid-Appalachians, including parts of Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia [15,16]. The states of Alabama, Kentucky, and West Virginia have classified the conservation status of V. parviflorum as critically imperiled (S1), imperiled (S2), and vulnerable (S3), respectively [18,20]. This plant is most easily discovered in the spring when it reaches peak germination [21].…”

Hydrology and soil magnetic susceptibility as predictors of planted tree survival in a restored floodplain forest

“…Currently, there are very few simple tools to measure hydrologic conditions in restored wetlands. Piezometers and unlined observation wells are used to measure hydrology, but they can be expensive and time-consuming (Faulkner et al 1989, Thompson et al 2012. In contrast, soil magnetic susceptibility (MS), a proxy for soil drainage at sites with similar soil parent materials Vepraskas 2000, Grimley et al 2004), is easy to measure at a reasonable cost, is quantitative, and may be a useful tool for restoration managers when planning tree plantings.…”

Edaphic and Land Use Influences on Central Appalachian Fens

“…While nutrients generally increase with alkalinity this increase may also encompass shifts in nutrient limitation (Bedford et al 1999). Thompson et al (2011) and Rentch et al (2008) found soil nutrient status was not strongly correlated with wetland plant communities. Bedford et al (1999) however, found that nitrogen or P availability may control floristic assemblages in peatlands.…”