Content uploaded by Roxane Andersen
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Roxane Andersen on Jan 22, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
REVIEW ARTICLE
Towards Developing a Functional-Based Approach
for Constructed Peatlands Evaluation in the Alberta Oil
Sands Region, Canada
Felix Nwaishi &Richard M. Petrone &Jonathan S. Price &
Roxane Andersen
Received: 21 March 2014 /Accepted: 23 December 2014
#Society of Wetland Scientists 2015
Abstract Peatlands support vital ecosystem services such as
water regulation, specific habitat provisions and carbon stor-
age. In Canada, anthropogenic disturbance from energy ex-
ploration has undermined the capacity of peatlands to support
these vital ecosystem services, and thus presents the need for
their reclamation to a functional ecosystem. As attempts are
now being made to implement reclamation plans on post-
mining oil sands landscapes, a major challenge remains in
the absence of a standard framework for evaluating the func-
tional state of a constructed peatland. To address this chal-
lenge, we present a functional-based approach that can guide
the evaluation of constructed peatlands in theAlberta oilsands
region. We achieved this by conducting a brief review, which
synthesized the dominant processes of peatland functional de-
velopment in natural analogues. Through the synthesis, we
identified the interaction and feedback processes that under-
line various peatland ecosystem functions and their quantifi-
able variables. By exploring the mechanism of key ecosystem
interactions, we highlighted the sensitivity of microbially me-
diated biogeochemical processes to a range of variability in
other ecosystem functions, and thus the appropriateness of
using them as functional indicators of ecosystem condition.
Following the verification ofthis concept through current pilot
fen reclamation projects, we advocate the need for further
research towards modification to a more cost-efficient ap-
proach that can be applicable to large-scale fen reclamation
projects in this region.
Keywords Alberta oil sands .Biogeochemical processes .
Constructed peatlands .Ecosystem functions .Reclamation
evaluation
Introduction
Since the early 17th century, northern peatlands have become
increasingly pressured from anthropogenic disturbances, as
drainage for agricultural improvement became a common
practice, and as the demand for peat as horticultural substrate
andfuelgrew(Martinietal.2006). More recently, the discov-
ery of oil sands deposits beneath some boreal forest peatlands
in north-western North America have resulted in one of the
world’s largest industrial exploitation of pristine peatland eco-
systems (Rooney et al. 2012). In this region, open-pit mining
for oil sands involves the total stripping of peat layers, leaving
landscapes with very large pits approximately 100 m in depth
(Johnson and Miyanishi 2008). The outcome of this process is
a complete loss of peatlands and their associated ecosystem
services (ES) such as water storage and cycling, habitat sup-
port, and storage of carbon (C) and nutrients.
The environmental regulatory framework for Alberta oil
sands development requires the energy industries to return
post-mining landscapes to equivalent land capabilities, where
“the ability of the land to support various land-uses after con-
servation and reclamation is similar to the ability that existed
prior to industrial development on the land, but the individual
land uses will not necessarily be identical to pre-disturbance
conditions”(Alberta Environment 2009). Because of the foot-
print of oil sands operations (i.e. a fragmented landscape
F. Nwa is hi ( *)
Department of Geography & Environmental Studies, Wilfrid Laurier
University, Waterloo, ON N2L 3C5, Canada
e-mail: nwai5240@mylaurier.ca
R. M. Petrone :J. S. Price
Department of Geography & Environmental Management,
University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada
R. Andersen
Environmental Research Institute, University of the Highlands and
Islands, Castle Street Thurso, Caithness KW14 7JD, Scotland, UK
Wetlands
DOI 10.1007/s13157-014-0623-1
without remnants of the pristine structure), this regulatory ob-
ligation can only be achieved through reclamation, which will
involve the complete re-creation of landforms and ecosystems
such as fen peatlands that dominated the pre-disturbance land-
scape in this region (Vitt and Chee 1989). However, consid-
ering the notion that several decades are required for the ini-
tiation of the peat accumulation function in a peatland (Clymo
1983), peatland reclamation presents a significant challenge.
To begin to address this challenge, attempts are now being
made to design fen ecosystems on the post mining oil sands
landscape. For example, Syncrude Canada Ltd.’s Sandhill Fen
Research Watershed Initiative constructed a landscape (based
on hydrologic knowledge and intuition) to support peatland
development on a thin (~50 cm) layer of peat covering a con-
structed valley system (Wytrykush et al. 2012). Similarly,
Price et al. (2010) presented a concept for the Suncor Pilot
fen, which was tested with a numerical groundwater model.
The model suggested that the creation of fen peatlands on
post-mining landscape may be possible if peat is salvaged
before mining and placed in a hydrogeological setting that
can sustain the requisite wetness conditions required for the
establishment of peatland vegetation and stable hydrologic
conditions. The difference between these pilot fen designs is
that the Syncrude fen uses a managed water reservoir to sup-
ply flows to the system,while the Suncor fen is designed to
have a self-sustained hydrology (requiring no managed water
supply). These pilot studies involve the transfer of peat from a
donor site to a recreated landscape, to form the constructed
peatland. Although this approach will fast-track the initiation
of peat accumulation process in constructed peatlands, it is not
known if the transferred peat will support ecohydrological
functions similar to those present in natural analogues in the
long run. Hence, there is need to track the recovery of
reclaimed oil sands peatlands, especially at the early stages
of these pilot projects. These projects provide the opportunity
to develop a better understanding of the key ecohydrological
indicators for the evaluation of constructed fen’strajectory.
Considering that fen reclamation is a new and untested con-
cept, there is a dearth of information on the appropriate ecological
approach for monitoring the trajectory of reclaimed peatlands. At
present, the framework available for the evaluation of reclaimed
sites in this region was developed for other wetland forms such as
open-water marshes, and is based on the concept of indicator
species (Rooney and Bayley 2011). The appropriateness of such
a framework for reclaimed peatland evaluation is contentious
because relative to other wetland types, peatlands are functionally
and structurally unique; they are products of the advanced stages
of wetland succession (Bauer et al. 2003), and support more vital
functions (Vitt 2006). For example, unlike the open water
marshes, which will lose most of their water by evaporation,
peatlands in the Alberta Oil Sands region within the Western
Boreal Plains conserve water and acts as reservoirs that supply
upland ecosystems during drought periods (Devito et al. 2005;
Petrone et al. 2007a), and as such, the key ecosystem services
that they deliver (Grand‐Clement et al. 2013) cannot be effec-
tively assessed with the indicator species approach alone. Also,
the presence of indicator species (Stapanian et al. 2013) does not
account for the functional state of a reclaimed ecosystem, be-
cause an indicator species might be present in a reclaimed site,
yet not functionally equivalent to natural analogues as a result of
abiotic alterations (Dale and Beyeler 2001). That is, indicator
species may be present although ecohydrological conditions
(i.e. water use efficiency, nutrient cycling) are not suitable for
the long-term sustainability of that species in the reclaimed sys-
tem. Hence, if the framework used in evaluating wetland recla-
mation is applied to peatlands, such evaluations will be limited to
assessing reclamation based on the vegetation community struc-
ture and biotic conditions without providing much insight on
peatland ecosystem functioning: i.e. the interaction between bi-
otic and abiotic ecosystem processes that supports the continuous
flow of energy to sustain ecosystem services (e.g. carbon seques-
tration) in the reclaimed peatland.
It can be argued that the indicator species approach has been
used effectively to evaluate the attainment of restoration goals in
restored vacuum-milled peatlands of eastern Canada (González
et al. 2013), and perhaps peatland restoration concepts should be
applicable to reclamation. However, the difference between the
concept of peatland reclamation (i.e. recreating a peatland eco-
system where it has completely been removed from the land-
scape) and restoration (i.e. returning peatland functions on dis-
turbed peatland remnants) presents the need for developing a
rigorous framework that can capture the complexities associated
with reclaimed peatlands. For instance, the planting design
adopted in the Suncor’s pilot fen reclamation project involves a
combination of vegetation assemblage found in different fen
types (saline, fresh water, rich and poor fen) within this region
(Daly et al. 2012). The idea is to select for native species that can
survive the altered abiotic conditions expected in this constructed
ecosystem (Harris 2007). This concept could result in multiple
successional endpoints (Fig. 1a and b), making the indicator
species approach inappropriate in the latter case because, unlike
in restored bogs were the successional endpoint is known (i.e. the
recovery of a typical Sphagnum moss carpet), that of reclaimed
oil sands fen is relatively unknown due to multiple possibilities
(Fig. 1a and b).
Interactions between the combined native vegetation spe-
cies assemblages or invasion by non-native species and altered
abiotic conditions (e.g. altered hydrology and water quality) in
reclaimed sites could lead to the emergence of new ecosys-
tems. This has been observed in recreated landscapes
(Lindenmayer et al. 2008), which have been classified into
hybrid and novel ecosystems based on the degree of transfor-
mation from natural analogues (Hobbs et al. 2006). A hybrid
ecosystem is one that is functionally similar but structurally
different (e.g. combination vegetation species that occur in
different natural environments) from natural analogues, while
Wet lands
novel ecosystems have functional and structural characteris-
tics that are completely different from natural analogues
(Hobbs et al. 2009). Based on the definition of “equivalent
land capabilities”in the oil sands reclamation context, the land
uses targeted by reclamation can be classified as hybrid eco-
systems, which could evolve into novel ecosystems as a result
of the altered biotic and abiotic conditions anticipated in fen
ecosystems recreated on post-mining oil sands landscapes
(Harris 2007;Dalyetal.2012). The management of ecosys-
tems with a combination of rare species and/or altered abiotic
conditions will require adopting a novel approach that focus
on understanding their functioning. Hence, there is a need to
shift from the traditional indicator species approach to a
comprehensive functional approach that can improve our un-
derstanding of the functional characteristics of these recreated
ecosystems through a number of pilot studies, which will in-
form future large scale reclamation projects.
Developing a functional-based reclamation evaluation
framework requires an understanding of key functional pro-
cesses in natural analogues, the identification of quantifiable
measures of specific ecosystem functions targeted in reclama-
tion, and a comprehensive monitoring program that can cap-
ture the evolutionary interactions between biotic and abiotic
variables in the reclaimed ecosystem. We propose a concept
that will guide the evaluation of oil sands-reclaimed fen eco-
system from a functional perspective, which is more suitable
Inial stage of fen
reclamaon
Increasing degree of bioc alteraons
Increasing degree of abioc alteraons
- No change in
vegetaon structure.
-Change in water
chemistry, hydrology
and other abioc
variables
Slight change in
vegetaon structure
in response to rapid
change in abioc
condions
Rapid change in
vegetaon structure
in response to slight
change abioc
condion
- Rapid change in
vegetaon structure
without any change in
water chemistry,
hydrology and other
abioc variables
a
b
Fig. 1 Schematic representation
of: a) potential reclamation
trajectories in response to a range
of alterations in biotic and abiotic
components of the constructed
peatland ecosystem; and b)an
example of possible endpoints
that might result from the multiple
trajectories, specifically in
response to various chemical
gradients
Wetlands
for assessing what is essentially primary succession that has
begun at some “non-initial”state, and could lead to novel
ecosystems. We demonstrate the appropriateness of this con-
cept by: 1) conducting a brief review to synthesize the process-
es that dominate peatland succession and how interactions
between these processes supports specific ecosystem function;
2) identifying the key ecosystem variables that can be used as
quantifiable measures of specific ecosystem functions; and 3)
exploring the mechanisms of key ecosystem interactions to
identify the most suitable integral indicator of ecosystem func-
tioning. Hence, the aims of this paper are twofold: 1) to initiate
the development of a framework for integrating the diverse
research data generated from on-going oil sands reclamation
pilot studies, towards understanding the functioning of con-
structed peatlands; 2) and to stimulate discussions on refining
the current reclamation evaluation practices towards a
functional-based approach that will be most appropriate for
constructed peatland evaluation in the Alberta oil sands region.
Processes of Peatland Initiation and Succession
Peatland development is initiated by physical processes,
which are driven by environmental factors such as climate,
relief and hydrogeology. The interactions between these
external abiotic factors produce allogenic processes, which
feedback on the internal ecosystem variables and autogenic
processes such as plant and microbial community succession
(Payette 1988). Primary peat formation, terrestrialization and
paludification are the three main processes that have dominat-
ed the initiation of northern peatlands (Halsey et al. 1998;
Ruppel et al. 2013 and the references therein). These three
processes have been identified across North American boreal
forest peatlands, with paludification being the dominant pro-
cess over all northern peatlands (see Fig. 2; Vitt 2006; Ruppel
et al. 2013;Inishevaetal.2013). Kuhry and Turunen (2006)
described paludification as the inception of peat formation on
formerly dry mineral soil substrate occupied by terrestrial veg-
etation, following such change in local hydrological condi-
tions that result in the inundation or accumulation of runoff
water in topographic lower points. The water-logging of a
formerly dry mineral soil substrate alters allogenic and auto-
genic processes such as depth of water table and nutrient min-
eralization rates, respectively. Soil saturation leads to anaero-
bic soil conditions and reduced organic matter breakdown,
which results in decreased nutrient cycling. The deposition
of eroded nutrient-rich organic matter and dissolved sediments
by runoff water into the paludified site increases anaerobic
oxidation processes such as nitrous oxide (N
2
O) and methane
(CH
4
) production (Smemo and Yavitt 2011). Thus, at the early
ALLOGENIC
PROCESSES
AUTOGENIC
PROCESSES
F
CO2
-High wate
-Groundwa
- Nutrie
to anoxi
- Initiatio
process
Forest Paludifi
CH4
WT
ertable (WT)
ater influence
nt cycling due
a.
on of anaerobic
es
Successio
ication Stage
CH4
- High WT
- Groundw
- ↑ Light a
intercepti
opening.
-Structura
Jack pine
- ↑ litter C
- ↑ NPP of
onal Trajecto
Swamp
CO2
W
T
ater influence
nd ↓
↓
ion with forest
al collapse of
stands.
N ratio
f hydrophytes
ry of a Deve
Forest Stage
CH4
T
- High WT, b
microsites e
- Groundwa
influence
- ↑ET loses
opening.
- ∆ in water
by decomp
and rhizode
- Competitio
nutrients be
plants and
eloping Peatl
Initial P
CO2
WT
but aerobic
exist
ter
with forest
chemistry
osing litter
position
n for
tween
microbes
land under a
Peat Stage
- ↑ Peat depth
- ↓ Groundwate
influence
- ↑ Light and ↑
↑Moisture de
CH
CO2
- ↑ NPP
- ↑ CH4 produc
- ↑ Biomass
accumulation
Mineralisati
Boreal Cont
Minerotroph
Stage
Woody litte
er
ET,
eficit
-
g
-
H4
WT
tion
on rate
-
-
-
tinental Clim
hic Fen
e
er peat
- Isolation from
roundwater inf
- Precipitation fe
↓ WT
CO2
-↑Acidity and a
-↓ NPP
-↓ Biomass acc
↓ Mineralisatio
↓ Litter quality
ate
Ombrotrophic
Stage
Sedge litter peat
CH4
Woody litter
Moss carp
luence
d
2
WT
llelopathy
umulation
n rate
(CN ratio)
Bog
r peat
et
LEGENDS
= Ja
= Se
= Bla
= Hy
= F
= Eric
ack pine
edge tussocks
ck spruce
drophytes
loang mats
aceous shrubs
Fig. 2 The successional stages of a natural peatland under an ideal
continental boreal climate condition, highlighting dominant allogenic
and autogenic processes at various stages along the successional
trajectory. The thicker arrows indicate the dominant flux at different
stages. The horizontal lines extending from the middle to both ends of
the trajectory line indicated that microbial mediated biogeochemical
transformation are dominant in all successional stages due to microbial
competition for nutrients
Wet lands
stage of paludification, which is synonymous with the
rewetting of dewatered peatlands (Zerbe et al. 2013), the pres-
ence of nutrient-rich substrates such as mineralized peat will
make the paludified site a hot spot of greenhouse gas (GHG)
production (McClain, et al. 2003).
The persistence of inundated conditions in a typical boreal
forest retards the development of the Pinus banksiana (jack
pine) roots due to oxygen deficiency and reduced nutrient
cycling in the anoxic rooting zone (Tiner 1991). This leads
to the gradual senescence of Pinus banksiana roots, then
stands, creating more favorable conditions for hydrophytic
plants and trees that can grow in waterlogged conditions such
as Picea mariana (black spruce). At this stage, the poor nutri-
ent quality (high C:N ratio) of the decomposing Pinus
banksiana litter, further reduces nutrient cycling by altering
the nutritional status of the decomposer communities
(Thormann et al. 2001). Therefore, the litter quality (i.e. a
function of C:N ratio) of the reclamation substrate will be
one of the factors controlling the rate of nutrient cycling at
the early stages of reclamation. Following the structural col-
lapse of Pinus banksiana stands, opening of the forest cover
abets allogenic processes (e.g. reduced precipitation intercep-
tion and low evapotranspiration losses) that creates conditions
relevant to the invasion of hydrophilic plants, which marks the
first stage of vegetation succession (Mitsch and Gosselink
2000; Tuittila et al. 2007). At this stage, the physiological
structure of the site is similar to an open swamp in transition
to a marsh, containing vascular plants that are adapted to the
waterlogged conditions through the formation of tussocks,
large intercellular spaces (aerenchyma) and floating mats
(Rochefort et al. 2012). Part of the dead Pinus banksiana litter
is deposited into the anoxic zone where decomposition will
continue at a slower rate due to the metabolic energy con-
straints associated with phenolic inhibition under anoxic con-
ditions (Shackle et al. 2000). The aerated portion of the sub-
merged Pinus banksiana trunks and the floating mats creates
aerobic microsites that are colonized by aerobic microorgan-
isms. Aerobic microsites are hot spots of litter breakdown
where microbial secretion of extracellular enzymes like phe-
nol oxidase causes efficient degradation of recalcitrant organic
matter by releasing extracellular hydrolase enzymes from phe-
nolic inhibition (Shackle et al. 2000; Freeman et al. 2004).
Thus, aerobic microsites form the peat producing layer, or
acrotelm in a developing peatland (Ingram 1979). The partial-
ly decomposed plant litter produced in the acrotelm are sub-
merged into the deeper anoxic zone, the catotelm, which
forms the long-term peat accumulator in a peatland (Clymo
et al. 1998).
The biochemical composition of decomposing litter com-
bines with rhizodeposition to alter the water chemistry and
biogeochemical processes of developing peatlands (Strack
et al. 2006; Bradley et al. 2008). For instance, the persistence
of mineroptrophy (nutrient-rich conditions) and high
photorespiration increases the net primary production (NPP)
of Carex sedges (Dise 2009). High productivity of Carex
sedges have been associated with high CH
4
emission (positive
feedback) as a result of their aerenchymatic tissues, which
serve as conduits for transporting gases from the anoxic zone
to the atmosphere (Yavitt et al. 2000;Lai2009 and references
therein). Hence, at the intermediate stage of peat development
when minerotrophic sedges form the dominant plant function-
al types (PFT), the flux of CH
4
from the constructed peatland
is expected to be at its peak in the absence of other external
forcing factors such as sulfate (SO
42−
) deposition (Dise and
Verry 2001). Higher NPP also accelerates litter turnover
(Laiho 2006), and the subsequent increase in sedge peat accu-
mulation. Humification of accumulated peat leads to a
catotelm that is characterized by higher bulk density, lower
specific yield, pore size distribution and hydraulic conductiv-
ity relative to the acrotelm peat (Clymo 1992; Price et al.
2003;Holden2005; Petrone et al. 2008). These peat proper-
ties control the water regulation and storage functions in
peatlands (Fig. 3).
With increased humification of the catotelm peat, the up-
welling of nutrient-rich pore water from the mineral substrate
is retarded by three processes: 1) the production of organic
acids during peat humification increases the competition be-
tween hydrogen ions and cation nutrients (Damman 1978); 2)
the low hydraulic conductivity of the highly humified peat
reduces the upwelling of cation-rich solutes through the peat
matrix; and 3) diminishing head gradients as the elevation of
the mound increases. Thus, a continuous increase in catotelm
peat thickness gradually isolates the acrotelm from the
minerotrophic groundwater, resulting in ombrotrophic
(nutrient-poor) conditions (Vitt 2006). The appearance of
Sphagnum mosses is a floristic indicator of ombrotrophy, a
final stage in peatland succession (Mitsch and Gosselink
2000; Tuittila et al. 2013). Ombrotrophication is
biogeochemically associated with reduced mineralization
rates and NPP (Bayley et al. 2005), lower CH
4
and N
2
O emis-
sion, with CO
2
being the major GHG (Martikainen 1996;
Regina et al. 1996), and high acidity and production of
allelochemical that slows the rate of nutrient cycling
(Bradley et al. 2008).
Peatland Ecological Functions and Related Ecosystem
Variables
All the successional stages observed in natural peatlands may
not occur in a constructed peatland, because reclamation at-
tempts to skip initial successional stages by transferring peat
from a donor peatland to a constructed site. Hence, from a
functional perspective, it is expected that constructed
peatlands may start from the intermediate stage of natural
peatland succession. To be classified as an “equivalent land
Wetlands
capability”, ecohydrological conditions (especially biogeo-
chemical functions) in the constructed peatland are also ex-
pected to align with those observed at the intermediate stage in
natural analogues. Peatland ecological restoration targets the
recovery of hydrologic regulation and water storage (Price
et al. 2003; Holden 2005), biogeochemical transformation
(Limpens et al. 2008;Dise2009), vegetation species succes-
sion (Bauer et al. 2003; Tuittila et al. 2007), primary produc-
tion and decomposition rates (Clymo et al. 1998; Frolking
et al. 2001). Since these ecosystem functions vary along the
successional pathway of a developing peatland (Fig. 2), our
understanding of the functional state of a reclaimed peatland
can be improved by aligning their functional characteristics
with those observed in a natural analogue, to find a suitable
reference along the successional pathway that can be used for
evaluating a given site. However, assessing the functional
state of an ecosystem requires identifying the quantifiable
ecosystem variables that are associated with specific peatland
ecosystem functions (Table 1).
Hydrologic Regulation and Water Storage Functions
Peat physical properties such as pore size distribution, specific
yield, hydraulic conductivity and bulk density control the
movement and storage of water in the peat (Boelter 1968).
The hydrologic regulatory function of peatlands is a product
of the range of variability between these peat properties within
the acrotelm and catotelm (Fig. 3; Holden 2005; Petrone et al.
2008). The partially decomposed property of plant litter in the
acrotelm forms a porous medium through which water readily
infiltrates into the peat layers. The ease of infiltration through
the acrotelm is due to the presence of many large pores (high
average pore size) in partially decomposed plant litter, which
allow a greater proportion of the infiltrating water to be
drained by gravity (Price et al. 2003). As water infiltrates into
the peat matrix, the increase in water table is modulated by the
relatively high specific yield, as is its decline as water is lost to
drainage and evapotranspiration. During drier periods when
the water table is lower, the well-drained large-pore matrix in
the upper acrotelm becomes a poor conductor of water and
evapotranspiration losses are curtailed (Price and Whittington
2010). The rate of lateral seepage is defined by the hydraulic
conductivity of the porous peat; a function of the degree of
peat decomposition and compression. When the water table is
high, the acrotelm has high transmissivity and can readily
shed water, whereas during dry periods when the water table
is low, the highly decomposed catotelm peat characterized by
very small pores restricts lateral water loss to maintain water
storage in peatlands. Consequently, peatlands have the ability
Biogeochemical
Transformation Function
Active Microbial
Community
Water
Chemistry
GHG Fluxes
Redox
Potential
Photosynthetic
Efficiency
Biomass
Accumulation Rate
Plant Litter
Quality
Aquatic
C Fluxes
Primary Production
and Decomposition
Vegetation Succession
Function
Vegetation Community Diversity
Community
Competition
Seed rain and
invasion potentials
Peat De
p
th
ET
Losses
Watertable
Fluctuation
Hydrologic
Re
g
ulation Function
Peat Physical
Pro
p
erties
Fig. 3 Conceptual diagram demonstrating the dominant interaction and feedbacks processes that support various ecosystem functions in peatlands. The
double-pointed lines indicate a feedback interaction while single-pointed ones indicate a one-way interaction and points towards the dependant variable
Wet lands
Tab l e 1 The major peatland ecosystem functional characteristics targeted in reclamation, the quantifiable variables associated with specific ecosystem functions, relative cost of evaluation, level of
expertise required and the approach used in assessing key ecosystem processes in various peatland ecological evaluation studies
Peatland functional
characteristics
Quantifiable measures of ecosystem function Relative
cost
Level of
expertise
required
Approaches used in monitoring key ecosystem processes in Peatland ecological evaluation
studies (references)
Hydrologic regulation •Stratification of peat hydraulic properties
(specific yield, porosity, hydraulic conductivity, bulk
density)and Catotelm thickness
a
$++•Dipwells and piezometer nests to monitor water table dynamics
a
(Price et al. 2010)
$+ •Analysis of peat hydraulic properties
a
(Price 2003; Petrone et al. 2008; Cunliffe et al. 2013)
•Evapotranspiration (ET) losses and water balance
a
$$$ +++ •Continuous measurement of atmospheric hydrologic flux
a
(Petrone et al. 2001,2004)
Biogeochemical
transformation
•Greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes
a
$$ +++ •Chamber and micrometeorological measurements of GHG fluxes
a
(Petrone et al. 2001,
2003; Waddington et al. 2003; Strack and Waddington 2007)
•Redox potential
a
$$ ++ •Redox and DO measurements (Thomas et al. 1995; Niedermeier and Robinson 2007)
•Dissolved oxygen (DO) $$ ++
•Aquatic carbon fluxes
a
$$ ++ •Aquatic C flux measurements
a
(Waddington et al. 2008;Hölletal.2009)
•Microbial activity $$ ++ •MicroResp experiments (Andersen et al. 2013b)
•Mineralization rates $$ ++ •In-situ nutrients mineralization experiments
a
(Macrae et al. 2013)
Vegetation succession •Vegetation diversity
a
$ +++ •Vegetation survey
a
(Cooper and MacDonald 2000; Trites and Bayley 2009).
•Seedbank/rain and invasion potentials
a
$++
•Community dynamics $$ +++ •Remote sensing techniques (Ozesmi and Bauer 2002; Anderson et al. 2010;Knothetal.2013)
Biodiversity and trophic
interactions
•Functional microbial diversity
a
$$$ +++ •Microbial functional diversity
a
,metagenomics (Artz et al. 2008a; Preston et al. 2012;
Andersen et al. 2013a,b; Basiliko, et al. 2013)
•Species richness/diversity for various taxa
(other than plants)
$ +++ •Species number and interactions (Desrochers et al. 1998; Watts and Didham 2006)
Primary production and
decomposition
•Above and belowground biomass accumulation
a
$+ •Vegetation biomass measurement
a
(Camilletal.2001)
•Gross photosynthesis and ecosystem respiration
a
$$ ++ •Chamber measurement of gross photosynthesis and ecosystem respiration
a
(Frolking et al.
1998;Mooreetal.2002).
•Organic matter quality, e.g. C:N ratio of litter
a
$$ ++ •Organic matter analysis by FTIR spetroscopy
a
(Basiliko et al. 2007;Artzetal.2008b).
•Long-term litter bag experiments
a
(Thormann et al. 2001;Mooreetal.2007;
Lucchese et al. 2010)
The relative cost is mostly based on analytical/instrumental requirement: procedures that can be readily implemented in the field without much instrumentation are denoted as $; those that require
instrumental/analytical processing, but where the methods are well developed and inexpensive are $$; and those for which there is specialist equipment required and/or technical support are $$$. Similar
idea applies to denotations for level of expertise
a
Quantifiable ecosystem variables and measurement approach used in on-going pilot reclamation projects in the Alberta oil sands region. Those in bold text indicate what is considered the most important
variables and measurement approach
Wetlands
to self-regulate their hydrology and keep water levels relative-
ly stable (Rochefort et al. 2012).
In an intact peat layer, hydraulic conductivity, average pore
size and specific yield are expected to decrease down the
diplotelmic profile (from acrotelm to catotelm), while bulk
density increases (Clymo 1992). The gradual accumulation
of decomposing litter during natural peatland development
(Fig. 2) creates the diplotelmic peat layers. This attribute is
compromised in constructed peatlands because the process of
site preparation and donor peat deposition results in a
fragmented peat layer, which lacks the stratified properties
that support the hydrologic regulatory functions of intact peat.
The implications of this will be seen in the establishment
limitations of native peatland vegetation species. For instance,
regenerating mosses with large open pores are incapable of
generating a strong capillary rise of water from the underlying
fragmented peat because of the abrupt transition in peat hy-
draulic properties, notably water retention capacity (McCarter
and Price 2013). Decomposition and compression at the base
of the regenerating moss profile may take decades, but is
necessary to modulate the hydrology in a way that favours
carbon accumulation (Taylor 2014)Thus,therecoveryofpeat
stratification, which can be assessed by monitoring the peat
physical properties along the peat profile (Table 1), will be an
effective proxy for evaluating the recovery of hydrologic reg-
ulatory functions in a reclaimed peatland. This evaluation is
relatively easy to implement, and can be achieved within the
frontier of funds available to small reclamation research
groups. The root architecture of reclamation pioneer vegeta-
tion (Carex species) presents some potential to facilitate the
recovery of peat stratification through rhizosphere effect, dur-
ing root growth and development in constructed peatlands.
Mulching has been used to promote the recovery of micro
hydrologic functions, such as soil moisture regulation in cut-
over peatland restoration (Price et al. 1998; Petrone et al.
2004).
Biogeochemical Transformation Functions
The hydrologic regulatory function in peatlands delineates the
peat column into hydrological diplotelmic (oxic and anoxic)
layers, which creates a redox gradient. Another important mi-
crobial ecological niche exists at the interface of the hydrolog-
ical diplotelmic layers, a biogeochemical hotspot named the
mesotelm (Clymo and Bryant 2008). This is the layer where
the mean annual depth of water table fluctuates within the
acrotelm and can be quantitatively defined as plus or minus
the standard deviation of the mean annual depth of water table
within the acrotelm. Hence, the peat column can therefore be
described as a triplotelmic biogeochemical system.
Peatland biogeochemical transformations are products of
the feedback interactions between microbial activity and
chemical dynamics (Fig. 3;Hunteretal.1998). The type, rate
and pathways of biogeochemicalprocesses are vertically strat-
ified in response to the unique attributes of each of the peat
layers. Microbial functional groups, which act as the biologi-
cal engines of peatland biogeochemical transformation, show
a vertical stratification along this triplotelmic peat layer (Artz
2009;Andersenetal.2013a). In the acrotelm, the availability
of oxygen raises the oxidation state of inorganic elements,
while anoxia in the catotelm reduces oxidized compounds.
These changes in oxidation states involve redox reactions,
which form the basis of microbially mediated biogeochemical
processes in peatlands (Hunter et al. 1998; Falkowski et al.
2008).
Oxidized forms of inorganic compounds such as NO
3
−
and
Mn
4+
are readily available to plant roots within the oxic peat
layer since aerobic conditions efficiently sustain the energy
demand of microbial activities. However, in the anoxic peat
layers, anaerobic microorganisms are more efficient at utiliz-
ing the oxidized forms of some plant essential nutrients (e.g.
NO
3
−
,Mn
4+
,Fe
3+
and SO
42−
) as alternative electron accep-
tors. Consequently, this leads to the reduction in oxidation
state of inorganic plant nutrients, and subsequent production
of gaseous compounds like N
2
OandCH
4
(Martikainen 1996).
As with the early stage of peatland development, reduction
processes may dominate at the initial stage of constructed
peatland development, when the acrotelm layer is very thin.
Denitrification, the reduction process responsible for the re-
moval of excess mineral nitrogen (N) compounds from the
environment, is not a common process in natural peatlands
(Dise and Verry 2001; Seitzinger et al. 2006). But in the case
where peatlands receive elevated inputs of inorganic-N from
wet and dry atmospheric deposition (e.g. ~25 kg N ha
−1
yr
−1
rate of deposition have been reported for sites adjacent to an
active oil sands mine; Proemse et al. 2013), denitrification is
dominant (Aerts 1997). Denitrification may also serve as a
key mechanism for removing the excess N present in the
mineralised donor peat used in constructed peatlands, which
will be necessary for reducing N-toxicity to sensitive peatland
plants (e.g. Sphagnum moss) and eutrophication of down-
stream ecosystems (improved water quality).
Methanogenesis and sulfur reduction (SR) are well-studied
biogeochemical transformation processes in peatlands (Lai
2009 and references therein) and constructed wetlands (Wu
et al. 2013 and references therein). Based on the electron tow-
er theory (Laanbroek 1991), these transformations occur at
very low redox potentials (about −150 mV) when the reduc-
tion process becomes strictly anaerobic, involving only obli-
gate anaerobes like sulfur-reducing bacteriaand methanogens.
Within this negative redox gradient, SR outcompetes
methanogenesis in the utilization of available substrate as a
result of thermodynamic and kinetic advantages (Dise and
Verry 2001;Vileetal.2003; Gauci et al. 2005). Contrary to
the previous thoughts that anaerobic CH
4
oxidation is solely
Wet lands
dependent on SR, evidence from recent studies suggests that
other undiscovered anaerobic CH
4
oxidation pathways are
present. This study further explained that the reduction in
net CH
4
flux often observed after SO
42−
addition to peatlands
could be as a result of gross CH
4
production suppression and
not the stimulation of anaerobic methane oxidation (Smemo
and Yavitt 2007). This is based on the premise that in most
cases, the SO
42−
concentration of natural peatlands is below
the kinetic energy threshold required to stimulate sulfate-
dependent anaerobic methane oxidation (Schink 1997).
Therefore, this lends more support to the circumstantial evi-
dence that other unappreciated anaerobic pathways that in-
volve methane oxidation or methanogenesis inhibition (e.g.
reverse methanogenesis and NO
3
−
- dependent anaerobic
methane oxidation) are present in peatlands, and could ac-
count for the imbalance between anaerobic methanogenesis
and aerobic CH
4
consumption (Smemo and Yavitt 2011 and
the references therein).
However, the specific electron acceptors involved in these
anaerobic pathways were not determined by current studies,
which consistently demonstrate that in peat soils, the addition
of common electron acceptors (i.e. NO
3
−
,Fe
3+
and SO
42−
)do
not stimulate anaerobic methane oxidation (Smemo and Yavitt
2007; Gupta et al. 2013). These findings, however, may be
fraught with the limitations associated with in-vitro studies,
which fail to account for other controls that may complement
these common electron acceptors under in-situ conditions
(e.g. rhizosphere effect and re-oxidation associated with water
table fluctuations). In contrast to the electron acceptor/kinetic
energy limitations present in natural peatlands, anaerobic CH
4
oxidation and/or suppression are expected to be dominant
processes in constructed peatlands within the Alberta oil sands
region. This follows the observation that ongoing industrial
developments in this region are linked to elevated throughfall
and bulk deposition of reactive N and S, with mean annual
deposition rates of 25 and 20 kg S ha
−1
yr
−1
measured on
terrestrial sites near (~3 km) an active oil sands development
(Fenn and Ross 2010; Proemse et al. 2012,2013). Although
these deposition rates are low compared to those of other
North American, European and Asian sites affected by elevat-
ed anthropogenic deposition (Dentener et al. 2006), the max-
imum rate of S deposition (39.2 kg SO
4
-S ha
−1
yr
−1
)ishigher
than what was applied by Dise and Verry (2001)tostimulate
thermodynamically favorable processes at the expense of
methanogenesis.
Depending on the rate of methanogenesis and/or anaerobic
CH
4
oxidation, part of the CH
4
produced in a peatland is
liberated from the catotelm to the atmosphere by diffusion
through the peat matrix, ebullition (release of bubbles from
water-saturated peat) and plant transport (Strack et al. 2006;
Lai 2009). In the mesotelm, part of the CH
4
diffusing through
the peat pores undergoes aerobic oxidation by methane
monooxygenase (MMO) enzyme activity of methanotrophic
bacteria (Hanson and Hanson 1996). Considering the non-
specific catalytic behaviour of monooxygenase enzyme and
similarities between CH
4
and NH
4+
(Holmes, et al. 1995),
ammonium monooxygenase activity can stimulate either
CH
4
or NH
4+
oxidation in the mesotelm. This presents a
mechanism that can couple atmospheric N deposition and
associated denitrification to CH
4
sink functions in reclaimed
peatlands adjacent to active oil sands development. The
mesotelm and other aerobic microsites within the anaerobic
zones (e.g. the rhizosphere of sedges) are a very critical niche
in the global C biogeochemical cycle because the oxidation of
CH
4
can reduce the global warming potential of peatland CH
4
emission by 3.7 times per molecule per 100 years relative to
CO
2
(Lashof and Ahuja 1990; Lelieveld et al. 2002; Shindell
et al. 2005; Frolking and Roulet 2007). Hence, the develop-
ment of a functional mesotelm in constructed peatlands is
essential to mitigate the potential contribution of these
peatlands to global warming. Since dominant hydrological
regimes poses a major control on the periodically oxic/
anoxic mesotelm (Clymo and Bryant 2008), the absence of
hydrologic regulatory function at the early stage of reclama-
tion may result in limited aerobic CH
4
oxidation potential.
This suggests that anaerobic CH
4
oxidation and/or
methanogenesis inhibition could be the dominant pathways
of CH
4
sink function until a functional mesotelm layer is
formed in the constructed peatlands.
Ecosystem variables such as GHG fluxes are products of
the biogeochemical transformation functions in peatlands, and
can therefore be used as quantifiable proxies to assess the state
of biogeochemical transformation functions in constructed
peatlands. Also, since oxygen limitation in the saturated peat
layer is a major factor that determines the rate of biogeochem-
ical transformations (Armstrong 1967); the concentration of
dissolved oxygen (DO) and redox potential can be used as a
quantifiable ecosystem variable for assessing the potentially
dominant redox process in constructed peatlands.
Furthermore, measuring microbial activities, using recent ad-
vanced techniques in environmental genomics and stable iso-
tope probing (Manefield et al. 2002;Whiteleyetal.2006)can
be explored as a means to identify active taxa (through in situ
extraction and analysis of rRNA) that can then be related to
specific biogeochemical functions. Although this evaluation
approach might seem unrealistic within the scope of small-
scale research, these approaches are essential to identify the
active portion of the microbial community and to associate
specific micro-organisms with key processes under given en-
vironmental conditions (Basiliko et al. 2013). Alternatively,
within the scope of limited resources, evaluation of temporal
variability in water table depth, microbial activity, nutrient
mineralization rates and GHG fluxes can be explored to un-
derstand biogeochemical functioning of the ecosystem.
Although it can be argued that these can only provide specu-
lative information on the dominant microbially-mediated
Wetlands
biogeochemical processes, the products of the processes
(NO
3
−
,Mn
4+
,Fe
3+
and SO
42−
) can be easily analyzed to iden-
tify dominant functions.
Vegetation Succession Function
Peatland vegetation species succession is the function that
enables peatlands to develop into a unique habitat that sup-
ports biodiversity, a vital ecosystem service in pristine
peatlands. The water chemistry and dominant hydrologic con-
ditions control the succession of vegetation species in
peatlands (Fig. 3; Tuittila et al. 2007). The recovery of vege-
tation succession functions in oil sands constructed peatlands
is of utmost priority to reclamation stakeholders in the Alberta
oil sands region. But concerns have been raised about the
effect of industrial effluents of salinity and napthenates-
affected water from substrate materials used in constructing
surrounding hill slopes, on the recovery of this vital peatland
function (Price et al. 2010; Rooney and Bayley 2011). The
response ofreclamation vegetation assemblages to altered abi-
otic environment is unknown. However, greenhouse studies
(Pouliot et al. 2012; Rezanezhad et al. 2012) demonstrated
that some vascular plants such as Carex species (e.g.
C. aquatilis)aswellasCalamagrostis stricta, can have
stress-free growth in the current salinity and naphthenic acids
(NAs) levels (~385 mg l
−1
of Na salts and ~40 mg l
−1
of NAs)
present in oil sands process-affected water (OSPW). The same
studies also showed that peat forming bryophyte species (e.g.
Bryum pseudotriquetrum,Dicranella cerviculata and Pohlia
nutans) could not tolerate these conditions. Considering that
field conditions are more extreme relative to mesocosm con-
ditions, the anticipated poor water quality presents a major
limitation to the field establishment of diverse, native peat-
forming vegetation species in oil sands constructed peatlands.
Field observations have also shown that in wetlands where
salinity tolerant vascular plants are dominant, biodiversity is
very low, leading to a “green desert”of vigorous plant stands
with low diversity of insects and vertebrates (Trites and
Bayley 2009; Foote et al. 2013).
The findings from these studies suggest that establishing a
diverse and analogous peatland vegetation community may
not be feasible at the early stages of constructed peatland
development in the Athabasca oil sands region. Since some
minerotrophic vascular plants have shown a potential to be-
come a tolerant pioneer species, constructed peatlands in this
region may follow a PFTs succession similar to that observed
in natural peatlands. However, the compromised chemical and
hydrologic gradients anticipated in these sites might combine
with invasive species competition to derange the recovery of
native peatland vegetation succession function. This lends
more supports to the inappropriateness of using only an indi-
cator species approach for the evaluation of constructed
peatlands in the oil sands region. Continuous (annual growing
season) vegetation surveys are being used to keep track of
community competition, invasion potentials and vegetation
succession in constructed peatlands. This measurement is very
important, but relatively labour-intensive in a large-scale
study. Hence, there is a need for further research on the en-
hancement of vegetation surveying through remote sensing
techniques.
Primary Production and Decomposition Functions
The capacity of peatlands to store carbon is due to an imbal-
ance between the rates of NPP and decomposition, driven by a
combination of hydrologic gradients, litter quality and water
chemistry (Thormann et al. 2001; Turetsky and Ripley 2005;
Laiho 2006). NPP is a function of the photosynthetic efficien-
cy of plants (Fig. 3), therefore varies among different peatland
PFTs (Laine et al. 2012; Tuittila et al. 2013). A study of
peatland NPP suggests that among the PFTs present during
northern peatland succession, minerotrophic sedges have the
highest NPP, while ombrotrophic forbs have the lowest
(Frolking et al. 2010). Considering the open structure of con-
structed peatlands, the combination of high light saturation
potential in sedges (Busch and Lösch 1998), adequate photo-
synthetic active radiation (PAR) in the continental boreal cli-
mate (Frolking et al. 1998), and atmospheric N input from oil
sands activities (Proemse et al. 2013) may result in very high
NPP for pioneer salinity tolerant Carex species. In addition,
high levels of nutrient deposition will also alter the litter qual-
ity of pioneer vegetation by reducing the C: N ratio, which
will accelerate litter decomposability (Fig. 3; Aerts et al.
1995), and consequently affect the rates of carbon accumula-
tion as peat (Bragazza et al. 2006). Hence, maintaining a near
surface water table is essential to peat accumulation in
reclaimed peatlands receiving high nutrient inputs and pro-
ducing low refractory litter. It is uncertain, however, whether
the fragmented peat substrate used in reclamation can main-
tain a stable hydrologic regime and support near surface an-
oxia for most of the growing season. Over time, if the hydro-
logic regulatory function is not recovered, total decompsition
may exceed NPP leading to net carbon loss.
Interactions Between Biotic and Abiotic Components
of Peatland Functions
The goal of peatland reclamation is focused on creating a self-
sustaining ecosystem that is carbon-accumulating, capable of
supporting a representative assemblage of species, and resil-
ient to normal periodic stresses (Daly et al. 2012). For an
ecosystem to be self-sustaining, the key ecosystem processes
that support various ecosystem functions need to be tightly
Wet lands
coupled, in order to maintain the continuous flow of energy
required for sustained delivery of ecosystem services.
Evaluating the actualization of reclamation goals will require
an integrated hydrological, biogeochemical and ecological re-
search monitoring program that can capture the complex in-
teractions between interrelated components of various ecosys-
tem functions.
Exploring the interactions and feedback mechanisms that
underline the tight coupling between ecosystem processes and
functions will guide the integration of reclamation monitoring
data towards evaluating the functional state of a reclaimed
ecosystem. The conceptual model, (Fig. 3) illustrates the
mechanisms that sustain the ecosystem processes of peatland
development and succession (Fig. 2). Considering the multi-
ple feedbacks that may result from simultaneous ecosystem
processes, it is worthy to note that these interactions are non-
unidirectional in nature. Interactions between components of
different ecosystem functions often result in inter-functional
dependency, a control feedback mechanism. For instance,
with regards to the interaction between hydrologic regulation
and vegetation succession functions, the phenological charac-
teristics (e.g. stomatal conductance and root architecture) of
peatland vegetation regulated ET losses, water use efficiency
and consequently, hydrologic fluxes (Petrone et al. 2007b;
Brown et al. 2010). As a feedback mechanism, vegetation
communities will also shift in response to changes in hydro-
logic conditions (Laiho 2006). The dependency of NPP and
decomposition on photosynthetic efficiency and litter quality
respectively, creates a similar inter-functional link between
vegetation succession and peatland carbon accumulation
functions (Bauer et al. 2003).
A strong feedback interaction between biogeochemical
transformation and vegetation succession functions is evident
in the interdependency between vegetation communities, wa-
ter chemistry, microbial communities and nutrient cycling
(e.g. mineralization and GHG fluxes). Similarly, the redox-
sensitivity of biogeochemical processes leads to a tight cou-
pling between hydrologic regulation and biogeochemical
transformation functions (Niedermeier and Robinson 2007).
The response sensitivity of these feedback mechanisms varies
among the levels of interaction, and can be explored as an
indicator of the functional characteristics of reclaimed
peatland ecosystems. Microbially mediated biogeochemical
processes are very sensitive, respond rapidly to changes in
conditions and are quantifiable. They also depend and feed-
back on all the other ecosystem functional components such
as water table fluctuations and redox gradients, plant litter
quality, and vegetation community diversity. Hence,
microbially mediated biogeochemical processes will be a suit-
able indicator of ecosystem functioning.
Such functional evaluation can be achieved by quantifying
measures of ecosystem processes that interact with biogeo-
chemical transformation functions (Fig. 3), using the most
important variables highlighted in Table 1. For example, a
practicable approach to undertake this functional evaluation
will involve monitoring the growing season’s hydrologic var-
iability (water table fluctuations), a function of peat stratifica-
tion. If the ecosystem is functional, microbial activities such as
decomposition and mineralization will be responsive to sea-
sonal variability in hydrologic conditions due to redox gradi-
ents (Fig. 3). As a result, the rate of nutrients transformation
and supply rates will determine vegetation productivity and
community diversity in the short-term and long-term respec-
tively. Vegetation productivity and community diversity will
feedback on litter quality, which interacts with microbial ac-
tivity and hydrologic conditions to determine the degree of
organic matter sequestration, a targeted function in peatland
reclamation. The functional state and trajectory of the con-
structed peatland can then be delineated by relating their func-
tional characteristics (e.g. microbial carbon utilization profile)
to those of different possible natural analogues (e.g. Fig. 1b;
saline fen and rich fen).
Conclusion and Recommendation for Future Fen
Reclamation Projects
Based on the limitations associated with the contemporary
bio-indicator “tick box”approach of wetland evaluation, we
present the concept of a functional-based approach that will be
more appropriate for the evaluation of constructed peatlands
in the Alberta oil sands region. The appropriateness of this
concept is grounded on the potentials to define the functional
characteristics that might evolve in an ecosystem where the
range of variability in biotic and abiotic conditions can result
to multiple trajectories and endpoints. Hence, this concept
addresses the need to develop an integrated functional-based
approach for the management of novel ecosystems that could
evolve in constructed peatlands.
Adopting this concept in fen reclamation projects is feasi-
ble since it is based on the integration of quantifiable ecosys-
tem processes that have been extensively studied in natural
and restored peatlands (Table 1). But since it can be argued
that some of these measurements are expensive, highly labour
and time-intensive, or require advanced scientific expertise,
we have highlighted the most important variable that can be
used to achieve meaningful results, especially within the fron-
tiers of a small research group with limited funds. However,
considering that this concept of fen reclamation is still at the
pilot stage, it is premature to determine if the functional eval-
uation of constructed peatland can be significantly simplified
to a less cost and labour-intensive venture, considering the
targeted functions that need to be assessed in this peatlands.
Our approach presents the first attempt to develop a cost-
efficient functional based approach to evaluate constructed
Wetlands
oil sand peatlands, and opens a horizon for future research on
the subject matter.
Considering that energy industries are obliged to ensure
that what they reclaim is functioning as natural analogues,
we trust a functional approach will ensure this, whereas the
indicator species approach might lead to wrong conclusions
about ecosystem processes (e.g. GHG emissions) due to al-
tered abiotic conditions. We also believe that the industry and
environmental regulators in this region appreciate the need to
develop a process-based evaluation approach, as they are al-
ready investing in pilot fen projects were this concept will be
tested. Although these pilot studies are cost-intensive, the cost
associated with these cannot be matched with the environmen-
tal cost of losing peatland ecosystem services in the first place.
Once informed insight about the functional characteristics of
the constructed peatlands have been established from these
pilot studies, we will be more confident in selecting the key
variables and processes that are most relevant in the context of
cost-efficient, future large scale peatland reclamation projects
in the Alberta oil sands region.
References
Aerts R (1997) Atmospheric nitrogen deposition affects potential denitri-
fication and N
2
O emission from peat soils in the Netherlands. Soil
Biol Biochem 29(7):1153–1156
Aerts R, Van Logtestijn R, Van Staalduinen M, Toet S (1995) Nitrogen
supply effects on productivity and potential leaf litter decay of Carex
species from peatlands differing in nutrient limitation. Oecologia
104(4):447–453
Alberta Environment (2009) Environmental management of Alberta’soil
sands. Alberta Government, Edmonton
Andersen R, Chapman S, Artz R (2013a). Microbial communities in
natural and disturbed peatlands: a review. Soil Biol Bioch 57:
979–994. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2012.
10.003
Andersen R, Wells C, Macrae M, Price J (2013b) Nutrient mineralisation
and microbial functional diversity in a restored bog approach natural
conditions 10 years post restoration. Soil Biol Biochem 64:37–47
Anderson K, Bennie J, Wetherelt A (2010) Laser scanning of fine scale
pattern along a hydrological gradient in a peatland ecosystem.
Landsc Ecol 25(3):477–492
Armstrong W (1967) The relationship between oxidation-reduction po-
tentials and oxygen-diffusion levels in some waterlogged organic
soils. Eur J Soil Sci 18(1):27–34
Artz RR (2009) Microbial community structure and carbon substrate use
in northern peatlands. (A. Baird, L. Belyea, X. Comas, A. Reeve, &
L. Slater, Eds.) Geophys Monogr Ser 184:111–129
Artz RR, Chapman SJ, Siegenthaler A, Mitchell EA, Buttler A,
Bortoluzzi E, Francez AJ (2008a) Functional microbial diversity in
regenerating cutover peatlands responds to vegetation succession. J
Appl Ecol 45(6):1799–1809
Artz RR, Chapman SJ, Jean Robertson AH, Potts JM, Laggoun-Défarge
F, Gogo S, Francez AJ (2008b) FTIR spectroscopy can be used as a
screening tool for organic matter quality in regenerating cutover
peatlands. Soil Biol Biochem 40(2):515–527
Basiliko N, Blodau C, Roehm C, Bengtson P, Moore TR (2007)
Regulation of decomposition and methane dynamics across natural,
commercially mined, and restored northern peatlands. Ecosystems
10(7):1148–1165
Basiliko N, Henry K, Gupta V, Moore TR, Driscoll BT, Dunfield PF
(2013) Controls on bacterial and archaeal community structure and
greenhouse gas production in natural, mined, and restored Canadian
peatlands. Front Microbiol 215(4):1–14
Bauer I, Gignac L, Vitt D (2003) Development of a peatland complex in
boreal western Canada: lateral site expansion and local variability in
vegetation succession and long-term peat accumulation. Can J Bot
81(8):833–847
Bayley SE, Thormann MN, Szumigalski AR (2005) Nitrogen minerali-
zation and decomposition in western boreal bog and fen peat.
Ecoscience 12(4):455–465
Boelter, DH (1968) Important physical properties of peat
materials. Proceedings of the 3rd International Peat Congress,
Quebec: 150-156.
Bradley R, Joanisse G, Lebel P, Thiffault N, Preston C (2008)
Degradation of boreal forest soil fertility caused by the invasion of
Kalmia angustifolia : a forest management problem. Retrieved Jan.
04, 2013, from http://www.tucson.ars.ag.gov/isco/isco15/main.htm
Bragazza L, Freeman C, Jones T, Rydin H, Limpens J, Fenner N,
Toberman H (2006) Atmospheric nitrogen deposition promotes car-
bon loss from peat bogs. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103(51):19386–19389
Brown S, Petrone R, Mendoza C, Devito K (2010) Atmospheric and
vegetation controls on evapotranspiration from a sub-humid
Western Boreal Plain peatland. Hydrol Process 24(8):1072–1085.
doi:10.1002/hyp.7569
Busch J, Lösch R (1998) Stomatal behaviour andgas exchange of Sedges
(Carex spp.) under different soil moisture regimes. Phys Chem Earth
23(4):443–448
Camill P, Lynch JA, Clark JS, Adams JB, Jordan B (2001) Changes in
biomass, aboveground net primary production, and peat accumula-
tion following permafrost thaw in the boreal peatlands of Manitoba,
Canada. Ecosystems 4(5):461–478
Clymo R (1983) The limits to peat bog growth. Philos Trans R Soc Lond
303:605–654
Clymo R (1992) Models of peat growth. Suo 43(4–5):127–136
Clymo R, Bryant C (2008) Diffusion and mass flow of dissolved carbon
dioxide, methane, and dissolved organic carbon in a 7-m deep raised
peat bog. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 72(8):2048–2066. doi:10.
1016/j.gca.2008.01.032)
Clymo R, Turunen J, Tolonen K (1998) Carbon accumulation in
peatlands. Oikos 81:368–388
Cooper D, MacDonald L (2000) Restoring the vegetation of a mined
peatland in the southern Rocky Mountains in Colorado, USA.
Restor Ecol 8:103–111
CunliffeAM, Baird AJ, Holden J (2013)Hydrological hotspots in blanket
peatlands: spatial variation in peat permeability around a natural soil
pipe. Water Resour Res 49(9):5342–5354
Dale VH, Beyeler SC (2001) Challenges in the development and use of
ecological indicators. Ecol Indic 1(1):3–10
Daly C, Price J, Rocherfort L, Rezanezhad F, Pouliot R, Graft M (2012)
Considerations for building a fen peatland in a post-mined oil sands
landscape. In: Vitt D, Bhatti J (eds) Restoration and reclamation of
boreal ecosystems: attaining sustainability development. Cambridge
Universtiy Press, Cambridge, pp 179–198
Damman A (1978) Distribution and movement of elements in
ombrotrophic peat bogs. Oikos 30(3):480–495
Dentener F, Drevet J, Lamarque JF, Bey I, Eickhout B, FioreAM, Wild O
(2006) Nitrogen and sulfur deposition on regional and global scales:
a multimodel evaluation. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 20(4). doi:10.
1029/2005GB002672
Desrochers A, Rochefort L, Savard JP (1998) Avian recolonization of
eastern Canadian bogs after peat mining. Can J Zool 76(6):989–997
Wet lands
Devito K, Creed I, Gan T, Mendoza C, Petrone R, Silins U, Smerdon B
(2005) A framework for broad-scale classification of hydrologic
response units on the Boreal Plain: is topography the last thing to
consider? Hydrol Process 19:1707–1714
Dise N (2009) Biogeochemical dynamics III: the critical role of carbon in
wetlands. In: Maltby E, Barker T (eds) The wetland handbook.
Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, pp 249–262
Dise N, Verry E (2001) Suppression of peatland methane emission by
cumulative sulfate deposition in simulated acid rain.
Biogeochemistry 53:143–160
Falkowski P, Fenchel T, Delong E (2008) The microbial engines that
drive earth’s biogeochemical cycles. Science 320(5879):1034–1039
Fenn M, Ross C (2010) Sulfur and nitrogen deposition monitoering in the
Athabascan oil sands region. Wood Buffalo Environmental
Association, Calgary
Foote L, Ciborowski J, Dixon DG, Liber K, Smits J (2013). Reclamation
of peat-based wetlands affected by Alberta, Canada’s oil sands de-
velopment. In EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, 15,
14240
Freeman C, Ostle N, Fenner N, Kang H (2004) A regulatory role for
phenol oxidase during decomposition in peatlands. Soil Biol
Biochem 36:1663–1667
Frolking S, Roulet N (2007) Holocene radiative forcing impact of north-
ern peatland carbon accumulation and methane emissions. Glob
Chang Biol 13(5):1079–1088. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.
01339.x
Frolking SE, Bubier JL, Moore TR, Ball T, Bellisario LM, Bhardwaj A,
Whiting GJ (1998) Relationship between ecosystem productivity
and photosynthetically active radiation for northern peatlands.
Glob Biogeochem Cycles 12(1):115–126
Frolking S, Roulet NT, Moore TR, Richard PJ, Lavoie M, Muller SD
(2001) Modeling northern peatland decomposition and peat accu-
mulation. Ecosystems 4(5):479–498
Frolking S, Roulet NT, Tuittila E, Bubier JL, Quillet A, Talbot J, Richard
PJ (2010) A new model of Holocene peatland net primary produc-
tion, decomposition, water balance, and peat accumulation. Earth
Syst Dyn Discuss 1(1):115–167
Gauci V, Dise N, Blake S (2005). Long-term suppression of wetland
methane flux following a pulse of simulated acid rain. Geophys
Res Lett 32(L12804). doi:10.1029/2005GL022544
González E, Rochefort L, Boudreau S, Hugron S, Poulin M (2013) Can
indicator species predict restoration outcomes early in the monitor-
ing process? a case study with peatlands. Ecol Indic 32:232–238
Grand‐Clement E, Anderson K, Smith D, Luscombe D, Gatis N, RossM,
Brazier RE (2013) Evaluating ecosystem goods and services after
restoration of marginal upland peatlands in South‐West England. J
Appl Ecol 50:324–334
Gupta V, Smemo KA, Yavitt JB, Fowle D, Branfireun B, Basiliko N
(2013) Stable isotopes reveal widespread anaerobic methane oxida-
tion across latitude and peatland type. Environ Sci Technol 47(15):
8273–8279
Halsey LA, Vitt DH, Bauer IE (1998) Peatland initiation during the
Holocene in continental western Canada. Clim Chang 40(2):315–
342
Hanson R, Hanson T (1996) Methanotrophic bacteria. Microbiol Rev 60:
23–51
Harris M (2007) Guideline for wetland establishment on reclaimed oil
sands leases. Working Group Cumulative Environmental
Management Association, Fort McMurray
Hobbs RJ, Arico S, Aronson J, Baron JS, Bridgewater P, Cramer VA,
Zobel M (2006) Novel ecosystems: theoretical and management
aspects of the new ecological world order. Glob Ecol Biogeogr
15(1):1–7
Hobbs RJ, Higgs E, Harris JA (2009) Novel ecosystems: implications for
conservation and restoration. Trends Ecol Evol 24(11):599–605
Holden J (2005) Peatland hydrology and carbon release: why small-scale
process matters. Philos Trans R Soc 363:2891–2913. doi:10.1098/
RSTA.2005.1671
Höll BS, Fiedler S, Jungkunst HF, Kalbitz K, Freibauer A, Drösler M,
Stahr K (2009) Characteristics of dissolved organic matter following
20 years of peatland restoration. Sci Total Environ 408(1):78–83
Holmes AJ, Costello A, Lidstrom ME, Murrell JC (1995) Evidence that
participate methane monooxygenase and ammonia monooxygenase
may be evolutionarily related. FEMS Microbiol Lett 132(3):203–
208
Hunter K, Wang Y, Cappellen (1998) Kinetic modeling of microbially-
driven redox chemistry of subsurface environments: coupling trans-
port, microbial metabolism and geochemistry. J Hydrol 209(1–4):
53–80
Ingram H (1979) Soil layers in mires: function and terminology. Eur J
Soil Sci 29:224–227
Inisheva LI, Kobak KI, Turchinovich IE (2013) Evolution of the
paludification process, and carbon accumulation rate in bog ecosys-
tems of Russia. Geogr Nat Resour 34(3):246–253
Johnson E, Miyanishi K (2008) Creating new landscapes and ecosystems;
the Alberta oil sands. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1134:120–145
Knoth C, Klein B, Prinz T, Kleinebecker T (2013) Unmanned aerial
vehicles as innovative remote sensing platforms for high‐resolution
infrared imagery to support restoration monitoring in cut‐over bogs.
Appl Veg Sci 16(3):509–517
Kuhry P, Turunen J (2006) The postglacial development of boreal and
subarctic peatlands. In. In: Boreal peatland ecosystems. Springer,
Berlin Heidelberg, pp 25–46
LaanbroekH (1991)Bacterial cycling of minerals that affect plant growth
in waterlogged soils: a review. Aquat Bot 38:109–125
Lai D (2009) Methane dynamics in northern peatlands: a review.
Pedosphere 19(4):409–421
Laiho R (2006) Decomposition in peatlands: reconciling seemingly con-
trasting results on the impacts of lowered water levels. Soil Biol
Biochem 38:2011–2024
Laine AM, Bubier J, Riutta T, Nilsson MB, Moore TR, Vasander H,
Tuittila E (2012) Abundance and composition of plant biomass as
potential controls for mire net ecosytem CO
2
exchange. Botany 901:
63–74
Lashof D, Ahuja D (1990) Relative contributions of greenhouse gas
emissions to global warming. Nature 344:529–531. doi:10.1038/
344529a0
Lelieveld J, Crutzen P, Dentener F (2002) Changing concentration, life-
time and climate forcing of atmospheric methane. Tellus B 50(2):
128–150. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0889.1998.t01-1-00002.x
Limpens J, Berendse F, Blodau C, Canadell JG, Freeman C, Schaepman-
Strub G (2008) Peatlands and the carbon cycle; from local processes
to global implications- a synthesis. Biogeosciences 5:1475–1491
Lindenmayer DB, Fischer J, Felton A, Crane M, Michael D, Macgregor
C, Hobbs RJ (2008) Novel ecosystems resulting from landscape
transformation create dilemmas for modern conservation practice.
Conserv Lett 1(3):129–135
Lucchese M, Waddington JM, Poulin M, Pouliot R, Rochefort L, Strack
M (2010) Organic matter accumulation in a restored peatland: eval-
uating restoration success. Ecol Eng 36(4):482–488
Macrae M, Devito K, Strack M, Waddington J (2013) Effect of water
table drawdown on peatlands nutrients dynamics: implications for
climate change. Biogeochemistry 112(1–3):661–676. doi:10.1007/
s10533-012-9730-3
Manefield M, Whiteley A, Griffiths R, Bailey M (2002) RNA stable
isotope probing, a novel means of linking microbial community
function to phylogeny. Appl Environ Microbiol 68(11):5367–
5373. doi:10.1128/AEM. 68.11.5367-5373.2002
Martikainen PJ (1996) The fluxes of greenhouse gases CO
2
,CH
4
and
N
2
O in northern peatlands. Glob Peat Resour 29–36
Wetlands
Martini I, Cortizas M, Chesworth W (2006) Peatlands: evolution and
records of environmental and climate changes. Elsevier B.V,
Amsterdam
McCarter C, Price J (2013) Hydrology of the Bios-des-Bel bog peatland.
Ecol Eng 55:73–81
McClain M, Boyer E, Dent C, Gergel S, Grimm N, Groffman P, Pinay G
(2003) Biogeochemical hot spots and hot moments at the interface
of terrrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Ecosystems 6:301–312. doi:
10.1007/s10021-003-0161-9
Mitsch W, Gosselink J (2000) Wetlands, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York
Moore TR, Bubier JL, Frolking SE, Lafleur PM, Roulet NT (2002) Plant
biomass and production and CO
2
exchange in an ombrotrophic bog.
J Ecol 90(1):25–36
Moore TR, Bubier JL, Bledzki L (2007) Litter decomposition in temper-
ate peatland ecosystems: the effect of substrate and site. Ecosystems
10(6):949–963
Niedermeier A, Robinson JS (2007) Hydrological controls on soil redox
dynamics in a peat-based, restored wetland. Geoderma 137(3–4):
318–326
Ozesmi SL, Bauer ME (2002) Satellite remote sensing of wetlands. Wetl
Ecol Manag 10(5):381–402
Payette S (1988) Late-Holocene development of subarctic ombrotrophic
peatlands: allogenic and autogenic succession. Ecology 69(2):516–
531
Petrone RM, Waddington JM, Price JS (2001) Ecosystem scale evapo-
transpiration and net CO
2
exchange from a restored peatland.
Hydrol Process 15(14):2839–2845
Petrone R, Waddington J, Price J (2003) The effects of restoration on
ecosystem scale flux of CO2 from a vacuum harvested peatland.
Wetl Ecol Manag 11:419–432
Petrone R, Price J, Waddington J, von Waldow H (2004) Surface moisture
and energy exchange from a restored peatland, Quebec, Canada. J
Hydrol 295:198–210
Petrone R, Devito K, Silins U, Mendoza C, Kaufman S, Price J (2007a)
Importance of seasonal frost to peat water storage in the western
boreal plains, Canada. In: Abesser C, Wagener T, Nuetzmann G
(eds) Groundwater-surface water interaction: Process understand-
ing, conceptualization and modelling. IAHS Publication, Perugia,
pp 61–66
Petrone R, Silins U, Devito K (2007b) Dynamics of evapotranspiration
from a riparian pond complex in the Western Boreal Forest, Alberta,
Canada. Hydrol Process 21:1391–1401
Petrone RM, Devito KJ, Silins U, Mendoza C, Brown SC, Kaufman SC,
Price JS (2008) Transient peat properties in two pond-peatland com-
plexes in the sub-humid Western Boreal Plain, Canada. Mires &
Peat 3(5):1–13. doi:10.1007/s10040-012-0935-2
Pouliot R, Rochefort L, Graf MD (2012) Impacts of oil sands process
water on fen plants: implications for plant selection in required rec-
lamation projects. Environ Pollut 167:132–137
Preston MD, Smemo KA, McLaughlin JW, Basiliko N (2012) Peatland
microbial communities and decomposition processes in the james
bay lowlands, Canada. Front Microbiol 3(70):1–15
Price JS (2003) Role and character of seasonal peat soil deformation on
the hydrology of undisturbed and cutover peatlands. Water Resour
Res 39(9):1241. doi:10.1029/2002WR001302
Price J, Whittington P (2010) Water flow in spagnum hummocks:
mesocosm measurements and modelling. J Hydrol 381(3):333–340
Price J, Rochefort L, Quinty F (1998) Energy and moisture considerations
on cutover peatlands: Surface microtopography, mulch cover, and
Sphagnum regeneration. Ecol Eng 10:293–312
Price J, Heathwaite A, Baird A (2003) Hydrological processes in aban-
doned and restored peatlands: an overview of management ap-
proaches. Wetl Ecol Manag 11:65–83
Price J, McLaren R, Rudolph D (2010) Landscape restoration after oil
sands mining: conceptual design and hydrological modelling for fen
reconstruction. Int J Min Reclam Environ 24:109–123
Proemse B, Mayer B, Fenn M (2012) Tracing industrial sulfur contribu-
tions to atmospheric sulfate deposition in the Athabasca Oil Sands
Region, Alberta, Canada. Appl Geochem 27(12):2425–2434
Proemse BC, Mayer B, Fenn ME, Ross CS (2013) A multi-isotope ap-
proach for estimating industrial contributions to atmospheric nitro-
gen deposition in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region in Alberta,
Canada. Environ Pollut 182:80–91
Regina K, Nykänen H, Silvola J, Martikainen PJ (1996) Fluxes of
nitrous oxide from boreal peatlands as affected by peatland type,
water table level and nitrification capacity. Biogeochemistry
35(3):401–418
Rezanezhad F, Andersen R, Pouliot R, Price JS, Rochefort L, Graf MD
(2012) How fen vegetation structure affects the transport ofoil sands
process-affected waters. Wetlands 32(3):557–570
Rochefort L, Strack M, Poulin M, Price J, Lavoie C (2012) Northen
peatlands. In: Batzer D, Baldwin A (eds) Wetland Habitats of
North America: Ecology and concerns. University of California
Press, Los Angeles, pp 119–134
Rooney RC, Bayley SE (2011) Setting reclamation targetsand evaluating
progress: Submersed aquatic vegetation in natural and post-oil sands
mining wetlands in Alberta, Canada. Ecol Eng 37(4):569–579
Rooney R, Bayley S, Schindler D (2012). Oil sands mining and
reclaimation cause massive loss of peatland and stored carbon.
PNAS Rep Early Ed 1–5
Ruppel M, Väliranta M, Virtanen T, Korhola A (2013) Postglacial spa-
tiotemporal peatland initiation and lateral expansion dynamics in
North America and Northern Europe. The Holocene 23(11):1596–
1606
Schink B (1997) Energetics of syntrophic cooperation in methanogenic
degradation. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 61(2):262–280
Seitzinger S, Harrison JA, Böhlke JK, Bouwman AF, Lowrance R,
Peterson B, Van Drecht G (2006) Denitrification across landscapes
and waterscapes: a synthesis. Ecol Appl 16(6):2064–2090
Shackle V, Freeman C, Reynolds B (2000) Carbon supply and the regu-
lation of enzyme activity in constructed wetlands. Soil Biol
Biochem 32:1935–1940
Shindell D, Faluvegi G, Bell N, Schmidt G (2005) An emissions-based
view of climate forcing by methane and tropospheric ozone.
Geophys Res Let 32(4). doi:10.1029/2004GL021900
Smemo KA, Yavitt JB (2007) Evidence for anaerobic CH
4
oxidation in
freshwater peatlands. Geomicrobiol J 24(7–8):583–597
Smemo KA, Yavitt JB (2011) Anaerobic oxidation of methane: an under-
appreciated aspect of methane cycling in peatland ecosystems?
Biogeosciences 8(3):779–793
Stapanian MA, Adams JV, Gara B (2013) Presence of indicator plant
species as a predictor of wetland vegetation integrity: a statistical
approach. Plant Ecol 214(2):291–302
Strack M, Waddington J (2007) Response of peatland carbon dioxide and
methane fluxes to a water table drawdown experiment. Glob
Biogeocheml Cycles 21. doi:10.1029/2006GB002715
Strack M, Waller M, Waddington J (2006) Sedge succession and peatland
methane dynamics: a potential feedback to climate change.
Ecosystems 9:278–287
Taylor N. (2014) Hydrophysical evaluation, soil water dynamics, and
productivity of Sphagnum carpets in a regenerating cutover
peatland. Waterloo: University of Waterloo MSc Thesis
Thomas KL, Price D, Lloyd D (1995) A comparison of different methods
for the measurement of dissolved gas gradients in waterlogged peat
cores. J Microbiol Methods 24(2):191–198
Thormann M, Bayley S, Currah R (2001) Comparison of decomposition
of belowground and aboveground plant litters in peatlands of boreal
Alberta, Canada. Can J Bot 79:9–22
Tiner R (1991) The concept of hydrophyte for wetland identification.
Bioscience 41(4):234–247
Wet lands
Trites M, Bayley S (2009) Vegetation communities in continental boreal
wetlands along a salinity gradient: implications for oil sands mining
reclamation. Aquat Bot 91(1):27–39
Tuittila ES, Väliranta M, Laine J, Korhola A (2007) Quantifying pat-
terns and controls of mire vegetation succession in a southern
boreal bog in Finland using partial ordinations. J Veg Sci 18(6):
891–902
Tuittila ES, Juutinen S, Frolking S,Väliranta M, Laine AM, Miettinen A,
Merilä P (2013) Wetland chronosequence as a model of peatland
development: vegetation succession, peat and carbon accumulation.
The Holocene 23(1):25–35
Turetsky M, Ripley S (2005) Decomposition in extreme-rich fens of
boreal Alberta Canada. Soil Sci Soc Am J 69:1856–1860
Vile M, Bridgham S, Wieder R, Novak M (2003) Atmospheric sulfur
deposition alters pathways of gaseous carbon production in
peatlands. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 17(2):1058. doi:10.1029/
2002GB001966
Vitt D (2006) Functional characterisitics and indicators of boreal
peatlands. In: Wieder R, Vitt D (eds) Boreal ecosystem. Springer,
Berlin Heidelberg, pp 9–24
Vitt D, Chee W (1989) The vegetation, surface water chemistry and peat
chemistry of moderate- rich fens in central Alberta, Canada.
Wetlands 9:227–261
Waddington J, Greenwood M, Petrone R, Price J (2003) Mulch decom-
position impedes recovery of net carbon sink function in a restored
peatland. Ecol Eng 20:199–210
Waddington JM, Tóth K, Bourbonniere R (2008) Dissolved organic car-
bon export from a cutover and restored peatland. Hydrol Process
22(13):2215–2224
Watts CH, Didham RK (2006) Rapid recovery of an insect–plant interac-
tion following habitat loss and experimental wetland restoration.
Oecologia 148(1):61–69
Whiteley A, Manefield M, Lueders T (2006) Unlocking the ‘microbial
black box’using RNA-based stable isotope probing technologies.
Curr Opin Biotechnol 17(1):67–71
Wu S, Kuschk P, Wiessner A, Müller J, Saad R, Dong R (2013) Sulphur
transformations in constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment: A
review. Ecol Eng 52:278–289
Wytrykush C, Vitt D, Mckenna G, Vassov R (2012) Designing landscapes
to support peatland development on soft tailings deposits. In: Vitt D,
Bhatti J (eds) Restoration and reclamation of boreal ecosystems;
attaining sustainable development. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, pp 161–178. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139059152.011
Yavitt J, Williams C, Wieder R (2000) Controls on microbial production
of meathane and carbon dioxide in three sphagnum-dominated
peatland ecosystems as revealed by a reciprocal field peat transplant
experiment. Geomicrobiol J 17:61–88
Zerbe S, Steffenhagen P, Parakenings K, Timmermann T, Frick A,
Gelbrecht J, Zak D (2013) Ecosystem service restoration after 10
years of rewetting peatlands in NE Germany. Environ Manag 51(6):
1194–1209
Wetlands
