Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Map showing the location of San Dieguito Lagoon, the construction modules, and habitat components within the San Dieguito Wetlands restoration site. A) Location of the project in San Diego County in coastal southern California, USA. B) Map of the wetland restoration construction modules alongside the San Dieguito River. This study was conducted in modules W2/3, W5, W10, and W16.
- Figure 2.
Change in the percent cover of salt marsh vegetation over time estimated from aerial imagery in modules A) W2/3, B) W16, C) W5, and D) W10 from 2008 to 2013. Data unavailable from above the 1.77 m contour in W5 (but see Figure 7) and below this contour in W10.
- Figure 3.
A–E. Change in the cover of salt marsh vegetation visualized using aerial imagery in module W2/3 from 2008 to 2013 (year indicated to the right of each figure). White dashed line indicates 1.77 m MLLW contour. Green = vegetation, brown = unvegetated. Note the constructed tidal creeks in 2012 and 2013 and change in location of the 1.77 m MLLW contour. The broader marsh plain was not re-graded.
- Figure 4.
A) View of module W2/3 in 2009 showing berm in foreground and sparse vegetation cover on the relatively flat marsh plain, B) view of W2/3 in 2010 showing continuing sparse vegetation cover at higher tidal elevations (foreground) and higher vegetation cover at lower elevations to the left, C) view of Salicornia pacifica (white arrow) colonization along the banks of constructed creeks in W2/3, and sparse cover on the surrounding marsh plain, and D) naturally recruited vegetation below the 1.77 m contour (white arrow) in W2/3, and sparse vegetation cover above this elevation (black arrow) prior to re-grading the marsh plain lower in 2014.
- Figure 5.
A–E. Percent cover of salt marsh vegetation visualized using aerial imagery in module W16 from 2008 to 2013. White dashed line indicates 1.77 m MLLW contour. Green = vegetation, brown = unvegetated.
- Figure 6.
View of planted vegetation primarily, Salicornia pacifica, looking east to west (A) May 2009, 3–4 months following planting and (B) June 2009, above the 1.77 m MLLW contour in module W16. Sparsely vegetated habitat below this elevation evident on the left side of (A). Same area in (C) February 2010 showing the boundary between naturally recruited (NR) and planted (P) vegetation.
- Figure 7.
A–E. Change in the cover of salt marsh vegetation visualized using aerial imagery in modules W5 and W 10 from 2008 to 2013. White dashed line indicates 1.77 m MLLW contour. Green = vegetation, brown = unvegetated. Black lines indicate module boundaries.
- Figure 8.
Percent cover of salt marsh vegetation measured along transects in the high marsh (1.77–2.07 m MLLW) in San Dieguito Wetlands from April 2009 through July 2012. Mean values ± 1 SE. Number of transects = 8 (W2/3), 4 (W5), 4 (W10), and 11 (W16).
- Figure 9.
Pattern of soil salinity at high marsh elevations in A) module W2/3 and B) modules W5, W10, and W16 in September 2009.
Northern Harrier (Circus hudsonius), a winter denizen of southern California’s coastal marshes. Ed. Tudor Jenks. 1911. The World of Nature. Chicago, IL: The Educational Society. The Florida Center for Instructional Technology, fcit.usf.edu.
Tables
- Table 1.
Planned areas (and percentage contribution) of low, middle, and high salt marsh habitat in the study restoration modules in San Dieguito Wetlands. Elevations of planned habitats: low marsh 1.09 m to 1.37 m, middle marsh 1.37 m to 1.86 m, and high marsh 1.86 m to 2.07 m MLLW (SCE 2005). This study was conducted in modules W2/3, W16, W5, and W10. See Figure 1 for module locations.
Planned Area (ha) Module Low Marsh Middle Marsh High Marsh W1 1.18 (44.2%) 1.27 (47.6%) 0.22 (8.2%) W2, 3 0.11 (1.4%) 3.47 (42.7%) 4.55 (56.0%) W4, 16 5.72 (26.4%) 12.31 (56.9%) 3.60 (16.6%) W5 1.55 (71.8%) 0.43 (19.9%) 0.18 (8.3%) W10 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2.87 (100) Total (ha) 8.56 (22.8%) 17.48 (46.7%) 11.42 (30.5%) - Table 2.
Number of container plants and spacing between plants planted at high marsh elevations in the San Dieguito Wetlands project in December 2008–March 2009. Spartina foliosa not included (MCC 2009). Plant species provided in Table S2.
Module Area Planted (ha) Number of Plants Plant Spacing (m) Planting Density (No. m−2) W2/3 5.73 183,596 0.55 3.2 W16 3.05 123,678 0.49 4.1 W5 0.067 3,118 0.46 4.7 W10 2.10 41,895 0.64 2.0 - Table 3.
Comparison of width and slope of the marsh plain among modules as measured along transects between 1.77 m and 2.07 m MLLW. Mean values ±1SE.
Module Width (m) Slope Ratio Slope % No. Transects W2/3 88.0 ± 6.8 1:289 0.35 ± 0.04 8 W16 20.3 ± 2.2 1:67 1.49 ± 0.13 13 W5 3.1 ± 0.0 1:10 10.20 ± 0.00 4 W10 105.9 ± 13.0 1:344 0.29 ± 0.04 4 - Table 4.
Results of beta regression analysis evaluating relationships between percent cover of native marsh vegetation and measured soil properties. Data from 1.77 m and 2.07 m elevations combined.
Variable df χ2 p Soil salinity (ppt) 1 7.073 0.008 Water content (%) 1 3.029 0.082 Bulk density (g/cm3) 1 0.154 0.695 Organic matter (%) 1 0.012 0.913 Total nitrogen (%) 1 2.456 0.117
In this issue
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- No citing articles found.