4.5 Article

Revisiting salt marsh resilience to sea level rise: Are ponds responsible for permanent land loss?

Journal

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-EARTH SURFACE
Volume 121, Issue 7, Pages 1391-1407

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/2016JF003900

Keywords

drowning; edge erosion; ponding; creep; sea level rise; sediment supply

Funding

  1. Gulf of Mexico Research Initiative

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ponds are unvegetated rounded depressions commonly present on marsh platforms. The role of ponds on the long-term morphological evolution of tidal marshes is unclearat times ponds expand but eventually recover the marsh platform, at other times ponds never recover and lead to permanent marsh loss. Existing field observations indicate that episodic disturbances of the marsh vegetation cause the formation of small (1-10m) isolated ponds, even if the vegetated platform keeps pace with relative sea level rise (RSLR) and that isolated ponds tend to deepen and enlarge until they eventually connect to the channel network. Here I implement a simple model to study the vertical and planform evolution of a single connected pond. A newly connected pond recovers if its bed lies above the limit for marsh plant growth or if the inorganic deposition rate is larger than the RSLR rate. A pond that cannot accrete faster than RSLR will deepen and enlarge, eventually entering a runaway erosion by wave edge retreat. A large tidal range, a large sediment supply, and a low rate of RSLR favor pond recovery. The model suggests that inorganic sediment deposition alone controls pond recovery, even in marshes where organic matter dominates accretion of the vegetated platform. As such, halting permanent marsh loss by pond collapse requires to increase inorganic sediment deposition. Because pond collapse is possible even if the vegetated platform keeps pace with RSLR, I conclude that marsh resilience to RSLR is less than previously quantified.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available