1 / 12

Macrophyte performance as a function of platform elevation in micro- and macrotidal salt marshes

Department of Biological Sciences University of South Carolina Columbia, SC 29208. Macrophyte performance as a function of platform elevation in micro- and macrotidal salt marshes. Diana Rodriguez. Experimental Design. Six treatments and six replicates within treatments.

rory
Download Presentation

Macrophyte performance as a function of platform elevation in micro- and macrotidal salt marshes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Department of Biological Sciences University of South Carolina Columbia, SC 29208 Macrophyte performance as a function of platform elevation in micro- and macrotidal salt marshes Diana Rodriguez

  2. Experimental Design Six treatments and six replicates within treatments Replicated at three sites with varying tidal ranges: Cocodrie, La -- 30-40 cm North Inlet, SC -- 1.5 m PIE, MA -- 3-4 m Growth response of S. alterniflora will likely be affected by varying the marsh platform (MP) relative to local mean tidal range. MP

  3. Nov. harvest & May planting Platform varies from 0.5 m – 1.33 m MHT

  4. Average Stem Height – Cocodrie, LA } Low marsh morphology } High marsh morphology

  5. Average Stem Height – PIE, LTER, MA } Low marsh } High marsh

  6. Average Stem Density – Cocodrie, LA } Within MHT & MLT } Further from MHT & MLT

  7. Average Stem Density – PIE, LTER, MA

  8. NAPP – Cocodrie, LA (microtidal site) MHT MLT

  9. NAPP – PIE LTER, MA (macrotidal site) MHT MLT

  10. Aboveground:Belowground Ratio – PIE LTER, MA Increase in aboveground biomass as you decrease height of platform below MHT

  11. Belowground Biomass – PIE, LTER, MA n=3

  12. Summary • Lower stem densities below MHT • Morphologically similar to low marsh • % belowground biomass of first 10 cm appears to increase below MHT • Higher stem densities above MHT • Morphologically similar to high marsh • NAPP appears to increase (in microtidal site) with increasing inundation

More Related