Early successional vegetation assembly in a spatially variable hydrologic regime

References

• Andreas BK, Lichvar RW. 1995. Floristic index for establishing assessment standards: a case study of northern Ohio. Wetlands Research Program Technical Report WRP-DE-8. Vicksburg (MS): U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station.
   Google Scholar
• Andreas BK, Mack JJ, McCormac JS. 2004. Floristic Quality Assessment Index (FQAI) for vascular plants and mosses for the state of Ohio. Columbus (OH): Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Surface Water, Wetland Ecology Group; p. 219.
   Google Scholar
• Balcombe CK, Anderson JT, Fortney RH, Rentch JS, Grafton WN, Kordek WS. 2005. A comparison of plant communities in mitigation and reference wetlands in the Mid-Appalachians. Wetlands. 25(1):130–142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bedford BL, Walbridge MR, Aldous A. 1999. Patterns in nutrient availability and plant diversity of temperate North American wetlands. Ecology. 80(7):2151–2169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bigwood DW, Inouye DW. 1988. Spatial pattern analysis of seed banks: an improved method and optimized sampling. Ecology. 69(2):497–507.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brooks RP, Wardrop DH, Cole CA, Campbell DA. 2005. Are we purveyors of wetland homogeneity? A model of degradation and restoration to improve wetland mitigation performance. Ecol Eng. 24:331–340.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown SC, Bedford BL. 1997. Restoration of wetland vegetation with transplanted wetland soil: an experimental study. Wetlands. 17(3):424–437.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter MR, editor. 1993. Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Boca Raton (FL): Lewis Publishers; p. 823.
   Google Scholar
• Casanova MT, Brock MA. 2000. How do depth, duration and frequency of flooding influence the establishment of wetland plant communities? Plant Ecol. 147:237–250.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• [CFR] Code of Federal Regulations. 2008. Compensatory mitigation for losses of aquatic resources: final rule. Department of Defense, Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, and Environmental Protection Agency. 33 C.F.R. § 332; 40 C.F.R. § 230
   Google Scholar
• Cronk J, Fennessy MS. 2001. Wetland plants: biology and ecology. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; p. 462.
   Google Scholar
• Crow GE, Hellquist CB. 2000. Aquatic and wetland plants of northeastern North America, Volumes One and Two. Madison (WI): The University of Wisconsin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fassett NC 1957. A manual of aquatic plants. Madison (WI): The University of Wisconsin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fennessy MS, Cronk JK, Mitsch WJ. 1994. Macrophyte productivity and community development in created freshwater wetlands under experimental hydrological conditions. Ecol Eng. 3(4):469–484.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner RC, Zedler J, Redmond A, Turner RE, Johnston CA, Alvarez VR, Simenstand CA, Prestegaard KL, Mitsch WJ. 2009. Compensating for wetland losses under the Clean Water Act (redux): evaluating the federal compensatory mitigation regulation. Stetson Law Rev. 38(2):213–249.
   Google Scholar
• Hopfensperger KN. 2007. A review of similarity between seed bank and standing vegetation across ecosystems. Oikos. 116:1438–1448.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hough P, Robertson M. 2009. Mitigation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act: where it comes from, what it means. Wetlands Ecol Manag. 17:15–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkman LK, Goebel PC, West L, Drew MB, Palik BJ. 2000. Depressional wetland vegetation types: a question of plant community development. Wetlands. 20(2):373–385.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthews JW, Endress AG. 2008. Performance criteria, compliance success, and vegetation development in compensatory mitigation wetlands. Environ Manag. 41:130–141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthews JW, Peralta AL, Flanagan DN, Baldwin PM, Soni A, Kent AD, Endress AG. 2009. Relative influence of landscape vs. local factors on plant community assembly in restored wetlands. Ecol Appl. 19(8):2108–2123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthews JW, Spyreas G. 2010. Convergence and divergence in plant community trajectories as a framework for monitoring wetland restoration progress. J Appl Ecol. 47:1128–1136.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy J, Goldman-Carter J, Sibbing J. 2009. New mitigation rule promises more of the same: why the new Corps and EPA mitigation rule will fail to protect our aquatic resources adequately. Stetson Law Rev. 38(2):311–336.
   Google Scholar
• Newcomb L 1977. Newcomb's wildflower guide. Boston (MA): Little, Brown and Company; p. 490.
   Google Scholar
• Reed PB 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: 1988 national summary. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. Biol Rep. 88(24):1–244.
   Google Scholar
• Seabloom EW, van der Valk AG. 2003. Plant diversity, composition, and invasion of restored and natural prairie pothole wetlands: implications for restoration. Wetlands. 23(1):1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simenstad C, Reed D, Ford M. 2006. When is restoration not? Incorporating landscape-scale processes to restore self-sustaining ecosystems in coastal wetland restoration. Ecol Eng. 26:27–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson EH. 1949. Measurements of diversity. Nature. 163: 688.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sørenson T. 1948. A method of establishing groups of equal amplitude in plant sociology based on similarity of species content and its application to analyses of the vegetation on Danish commons. Biol Skr (K. Danske Vidensk. Selsk. NS). 5:1–34.
   Google Scholar
• Spieles DJ. 2005. Vegetation development in created, restored, and enhanced mitigation wetland banks of the United States. Wetlands. 25(1):51–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Symonds GWD. 1963. The shrub identification book. New York, (NY): Harper Collins.
   Google Scholar
• Ter Heerdt GNJ, Verweij GL, Bekker RM, Bakker JP. 1996. An improved method for seed-bank analysis: seedling emergence after removing the soil by sieving. Funct Ecol. 10(1):144–151.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Touzard B, Amiaud B, Langlois E, Lemauviel S, Clement B. 2002. The relationships between soil seed bank, aboveground vegetation and disturbances in a eutrophic alluvial wetland of Western France. Flora. 197(3):175–185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• [USACE] United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1973. Permits for activities in navigable waters or ocean waters. Fed Regist. 38:12217–12230.
   Google Scholar
• [USEPA] United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1980. Guidelines for specification of disposal sites for dredged or fill material. Fed Regist. 45:85336–85357.
   Google Scholar
• Weiher E, Wisheu IC, Keddy PA, Moore DRJ. 1996. Establishment, persistence, and management implications of experimental wetland plant communities. Wetlands. 16(2):208–218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wentworth TR, Johnson GP, Kologiski RL. 1988. Designation of wetlands by weighted averages of vegetation data: a preliminary evaluation. Water Resour Bull. 24(2):389–396.
   Google Scholar
• Zedler JB. 2000. Progress in wetland restoration ecology. Trends Ecol Evol. 15(10):402–407.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar