Content uploaded by Juan Calvo-Cubero
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Juan Calvo-Cubero on Mar 21, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Juan Calvo-Cubero
East Carolina University
Carles Ibáñez
Aquatic Ecosystems Program IRTA (Spain)
Albert Rovira
Freelance Researcher
Peter Sharpe
US National Park Service
Enrique Reyes
East Carolina University
Marsh elevation and carbon accumulation in a
Mediterranean restored marsh
(Ebro Delta, Spain)
SWS 2014 CONFERENCE
Huesca
Wednesday 17th September
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
EBRO DELTA: ECOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC VALUES
1. The Ebro delta is the largest delta in Western Mediterranean (330 Km2)
2. High diversity of coastal ecosystems: Coastal lagoons, bays, salt marshes, freshwater marshes…
3. Rice fields main economic activity (60% delta plain)
ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS: DELTAIC FLOODING RISK
EBRO DELTA FLOODING RISK MAP (year 2100)
Human infrastructures: Dams
Global warming
Sediment input reduction
Accelerated Sea-Level Rise
Higher risk (RSLR = 5 mm/yr)
Medium risk (RSLR = 7 mm/yr)
Lower risk (RSLR = 8 mm/yr)
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
DDeltaic subsidence = Flooding risk
Restored marshes
SUBSIDENCE MITIGATION
via marsh elevation
Marsh surface Loss
Damage of rice fields: Loss and saline intrusion
Human population displacements
(From Alvarado-Aguilar et al. 2012)
ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS: AGRICULTURAL POLLUTION
Rice field run off
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
Sediment
inputs
Fertilization
inputs
Eutrophication
Restored marsh Services
N & P FILTERS
Mineral soil
contribution
Organic soil
contribution
Restored Marsh Service
RSLR MITIGATION
CARBON SEQUESTRATION
Via Marsh elevation
OBJECTIVES
by conversion of rice fields
back to restored marshes in
the areas of lower elevation
Assess marsh
restoration initiatives
regarding factors
promoting marsh
elevation and carbon
sequestration
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
MAIN RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. Do fertilization and sediment inputs from rice field run off enhance vertical accretion
and elevation change in an oligohaline restored marsh?
2. Both vertical accretion and elevation change should have higher rates compared
with predicted RSLR in the Ebro Delta (5–8 mm yr−1).
3. Do fertilization and sediment inputs from rice field run off enhance carbon
accumulation in an oligohaline restored marsh?
sequestration
Aboveground
biomass
Leaf litter
deposition
Sediment
capture
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
Treatments and response variables
WATER TYPE
- Riverine irrigation
Fertilization subsidies
FLOODING
- 10 cm water level
-20 cm water level
-30 cm water level
+
-
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSIONS
Belowground
biomass Soil
expansion
Vertical
accretion
Subsidence = Compaction & decomposition
+
Mineral
content
Elevation change
- Riverine irrigation
-Ricefield drainage
Sediment subsides
+
-
Fertilization
subsidies
+/-
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN Location
Field Experiment
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
Organic Rice Field Waterfowl reserve
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
Partly nested design
VEGETATION COLONIZATION
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
VEGETATION COLONIZATION
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN Construction
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
SAMPLING DESIGN
J F M A M J J A
S
O N D
2009 2010 2011
J F M A M J J A
S
O N D J F M A M J J A
S
O N D J F M A M J J A
S
O N D
2012
Start: August 2009
Maximum
belowground
biomass
Maximum
Aboveground
biomass
Surface Soil
properties
RICE CULTIVATION SEASON
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
2009 2010 2011 2012
Vertical accretion
Marker horizons
sampling
Vertical accretion
Marker horizons
installation
Elevation
change
SET installation Every 3 months measurements
C content (g/Kg) x B. density (g/cm3) x V. accretion (mm/yr)
C soil accumulation (g/m2yr) =
MARSH ELEVATION STUDY: PCA RESULTS
RESPONSE VARIABLES LOADINGS (CORRELATIONS) EXPERIMENTAL UNITS SCORES
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
Component 1 (26.89 % variation)
explained by water type treatments
Component 2 (16.24 % variation)
explained by block effects
Component 1:
Vertical accretion-Soil properties relationships
Component 2:
Elevation change-Above/below biomass
VERTICAL ACCRETION
YES P=0.006
ELEVATION CHANGE
NO P=0.797
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
MARSH ELEVATION STUDY: ANOVA RESULTS
Differences between water types
MAX. ABOVEGROUND BIOMASS
NO P=0.309
MAX. BELOWGROUND BIOMASS
NO P=0.072
SURFACE MINERAL CONTENT
YES P=0.039
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
VERTICAL ACCRETION
NO P=0.681
ELEVATION CHANGE
NO P=0.868
MARSH ELEVATION STUDY: ANOVA RESULTS
Differences between water levels
MAX. BELOWGROUND BIOMASS
YES
P=0.002 Flooding
Stress
SURFACE MINERAL CONTENT
YES P=0.019
Higher
residence time
MAX. ABOVEGROUND BIOMASS
NO P=0.145
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
Paspalum spp.
VERTICAL ACCRETION
YES P=0.05
ELEVATION CHANGE
YES P=0.016
BLOCK 3
MARSH ELEVATION STUDY: ANOVA RESULTS
Differences between blocks
MAX. ABOVEGROUND BIOMASS
NO P=0.192
MAX. BELOWGROUND BIOMASS
YES P=0.028
SURFACE MINERAL CONTENT
YES P=0.004
CARBON ACCUMULATION STUDY: ANOVA RESULTS
Differences between water types, water levels and blocks
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
*
MARSH ELEVATION STUDY DISCUSSION
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
Aboveground
biomass
Leaf litter
deposition
Sediment
capture WATER TYPE
- Riverine irrigation
-Ricefield drainage
Fertilization subsidies
FLOODING
- 10 cm water level
-20 cm water level
-30 cm water level
+
+
-
-
Belowground
biomass Soil
expansion
Vertical
accretion
Subsidence = Compaction & decomposition
+
Mineral
content
Elevation change
Sediment subsides
+
Fertilization
subsidies
+/-
Weed Plant
Colonization
CARBON ACCUMULATION STUDY DISCUSSION
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
HIGH ORGANIC AND MINERAL SEDIMENT DISCHARGE
Rice field drainage water
CARBON CONTENT AND ACCUMULATION
+
CARBON CONTENT AND ACCUMULATION
HIGH NUTRIENT DISCHARGE
Rice field drainage water
BELOWGROUND CONTRIBUTION
-
-
+
MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION
1. Marsh elevation and carbon accumulation were generally
controlled by sediment contributions.
2. P. distichum played a significant role in marsh elevation via
root growth.
3. Restored marshes using either water type promote marsh
3. Restored marshes using either water type promote marsh
elevation gains higher than predicted RSLR at least during
the initial marsh development (3 years).
The use of agricultural runoff is
beneficial for marsh restoration
projects focused primarily on
mitigating RSLR and
C accumulation.
The use of P. distichum to mitigate RSLR
impacts is an inexpensive and effective
measure to promote marsh elevation as
the primary restoration goal.
AKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TECHNICIANS
Lluis Llornet
INTERDISCIPLINARY DOCTORAL PROGRAM IN
BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
Lluis Llornet
Rosa Valmaña
David Mateu
AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS PROGRAM
Research Project 056/RN08/04.3
Development of techniques to compensate
subsidence and sea-level rise in coasts and
wetlands of the Ebro Delta.
Mineral vs organic contribution to vertical accretion and
elevation change in restored marshes (Ebro Delta, Spain)
(Calvo-Cubero et al. 2013, Ecological Engineering)
Changes in nutrient concentration and carbon
accumulation in a Mediterranean restored marsh (Ebro
Delta, Spain)
(Calvo-Cubero et al. 2014, Ecological Engineering)
THANK YOU!
(Calvo-Cubero et al. 2014, Ecological Engineering)