4.5 Article

The Potential and Limitations of Diatoms as Environmental Indicators in Mid-Atlantic Coastal Wetlands

期刊

ESTUARIES AND COASTS
卷 42, 期 6, 页码 1440-1458

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12237-019-00603-4

关键词

Diatoms; Salt marshes; Coastal wetlands; Tidal inundation; Nitrogen

资金

  1. Landsberger Foundation
  2. USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture Hatch program [CA-R-ENS-5120-H]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Diatoms have been successfully used as indicators of past and present environmental conditions in freshwater and marine habitats, but their diversity and indicative properties in microtidal coastal wetlands of temperate zone are relatively poorly studied. The goal of this study was to determine whether diatoms can be used as indicators of sea level and nutrient content in coastal wetlands of the mid-Atlantic region of the USA. Our exploratory analyses indicated that benthic and marsh soil diatom assemblages were jointly controlled by tidal elevation, salinity, sediment texture, and nutrient content, while the relative importance of these factors varied among datasets targeting different environmental gradients. The habitat type could be correctly inferred from diatom assemblage composition in 79% of samples. A diatom-based model developed for inferring sediment nitrogen content had an average accuracy of prediction of 12.5% of observed nitrogen range. Models for inferring tidal exposure from diatom assemblage data provided assessment with 11-16% accuracy as estimated by the bootstrapped root mean square errors of prediction, which is similar to the accuracy of models based on other microfossils. These results show that despite inherent challenges, such as tidal redistribution of diatom frustules across the intertidal zone, diatoms can be successfully used as an independent source of evidence in paleoreconstructions of sea-level change and nitrogen enrichment, as well as for monitoring current nutrient pollution in mid-Atlantic wetlands.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据