Randolph M. Chambers

An 8-wk mark-and-recapture study using baited fyke nets showed that native red-bellied cooters (Pseudemys rubriventris) (estimated population 738–3618) were more abundant than non-native red-eared sliders (Trachemys scripta elegans) (estimated population 256–520) in Lake Matoaka in southeastern Virginia. Red-bellied cooters have maintained a similarly large population since a prior study in 2004 with a balanced female:male sex ratio of 0.91:1, but over that time, capture of red-eared sliders has increased almost 5-fold; their size distribution is broader than that of red-bellied cooters, and their sex ratio is dominated by females (2.02:1). Persistence of native red-bellied cooters in Lake Matoaka may be challenged by the apparent ongoing growth of the invasive red-eared slider population.

Living shorelines (LSs) increasingly are implemented as a defense against coastal erosion and rising seas; however, their ecological function for wading birds has not been evaluated. Here, we compared heron and shorebird use of LSs (created fringe salt marshes with a wave break fronting the planted marshes) to natural‐fringe marshes (NFMs) in the Chesapeake Bay. We assessed the use between May and August in 2018 and 2019 at 13 tidal marsh pairs, each consisting of one LS and NFM site, with sites within pairs having similar surrounding land use and wave exposure. In each year, we assessed diurnal use with video cameras recording at least four 30‐min segments/day for a total of 677 h of video, and nocturnal/diurnal use with acoustic recording equipment recording 10‐min sound files every 2 h/day for a total of 160 h of recording. We quantified diurnal use by measuring the total time a species spent at a site, and nocturnal/diurnal use by estimating the probability of detection (i.e., presence/absence). We detected four heron and five shorebird species when data were aggregated across pairs and sampling methods. Using Bayesian mixed models, time of use did not differ between LS and NFM sites for great blue herons (Ardea herodias) and yellow‐crowned night‐herons (Nyctanassa violacea). In contrast, time of use was higher for green herons (Butorides virescens) and spotted sandpipers (Actitis macularis) at LS sites but tended to be higher for great egrets (Ardea alba) at NFM sites. The probability of detection did not differ between LS and NFM sites for great blue herons and great egrets (combined as “Ardea spp.” due to difficulty in differentiating calls under noisy conditions), yellow‐crowned night‐herons, and spotted sandpipers. Green herons and killdeer (Charadrius vociferous), however, tended to be detected more frequently at LS sites. Collectively, our research indicates that LSs are functionally equivalent to NFMs for herons and shorebirds. We hypothesize that the low‐profile rock sills of LS provide platforms for resting and preening and offer prey even when vegetated marshes are unavailable to short‐legged species during flooding tides. In addition to their established reduction of coastal erosion, LSs provide habitat for herons and shorebird species.

As sea‐level rises, low‐salinity tidal marshes experience greater flooding with more saline water. In the Chesapeake Bay estuary, we compared the 1980 and 2014 tidal marsh inventories (TMIs) of plant communities from James City County, Virginia, USA, with respect to the spatial distribution of two species—the invasive reed Phragmites australis and native salt marsh grass Spartina alterniflora–plus overall species richness. Since the 1980 TMI, the total area of low‐salinity tidal marshes in which P. australis occurred increased from 0.46 km² to 6.30 km² in 2014. Between TMIs, however, the total area of low‐salinity marshes occupied by S. alterniflora increased by only 0.02 km². Species richness in low‐salinity tidal marshes decreased from 41 to 25 between TMIs. To assess seedling emergence under increased flooding and salinity, we completed two seed bank germination experiments using soil samples collected from six low‐salinity marshes containing established P. australis stands. In the first experiment, more seedlings emerged in the two low‐salinity (0 vs. 5 ppt) treatments after seven weeks, irrespective of flooding (water 3.75 cm below vs. at soil surface), but no P. australis or S. alterniflora germinated. For the second experiment, we added seeds of P. australis and S. alterniflora to soils exposed to the same flooding and salinity treatments to test the impact of these plant competitors on seedling emergence. No difference in number of seedlings was detected among treatments, but the number of species and their relative abundance was significantly affected by flooding (ANOSIM, R = 0.138, P < 0.001). The presence of P. australis and S. alterniflora seedlings appeared to shift the physical factor more influential on seedling emergence from salinity to flooding. For both seed bank experiments, more seedlings but not more species emerged from soils collected from marshes where P. australis coverage was P. australis and S. alterniflora—a trend expected to continue here and in other riverine estuaries of the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts.

Nature-based features provide a welcome class of adaptations to promote ecological resilience in the face of climate change. Along coastlines, living shorelines are among the preferred adaptation strategies to both reduce erosion and provide ecological functions. As an alternative to shoreline armoring, living shorelines are viewed favorably among coastal managers, wetlands boards, and some private property owners, but they have yet to undergo a thorough examination of how their levels of ecosystem functions compare to their closest natural counterpart: fringing marshes. Here, we provide a synthesis of results from a multi-year, large-spatial-scale study in which we compared numerous ecological metrics measured in thirteen pairs of living shorelines and natural fringing marshes throughout coastal Virginia, USA. Overall, we found that living shorelines were functionally equivalent to natural marshes in nearly all measured aspects, except for a lag in sediment composition. These data support the prioritization of living shorelines as a coastal adaptation strategy.

Coastal communities increasingly invest in natural and nature‐based features (e.g., living shorelines) as a strategy to protect shorelines and enhance coastal resilience. Tidal marshes are a common component of these strategies because of their capacity to reduce wave energy and storm surge impacts. Performance metrics of restoration success for living shorelines tend to focus on how the physical structure of the created marsh enhances shoreline protection via proper elevation and marsh plant presence. These metrics do not fully evaluate the level of marsh ecosystem development. In particular, the presence of key marsh bivalve species can indicate the capability of the marsh to provide non‐protective services of value, such as water quality improvement and habitat provision. We observed an unexpected low to no abundance of the filter‐feeding ribbed mussel, Geukensia demissa, in living shoreline marshes throughout Chesapeake Bay. In salt marsh ecosystems along the Atlantic Coast of the United States, ribbed mussels improve water quality, enhance nutrient removal, stabilize the marsh, and facilitate long‐term sustainability of the habitat. Through comparative field surveys and experiments within a chronosequence of 13 living shorelines spanning 2–16 years since construction, we examined three factors we hypothesized may influence recruitment of ribbed mussels to living shoreline marshes: (1) larval access to suitable marsh habitat, (2) sediment quality of low marsh (i.e., potential mussel habitat), and (3) availability of high‐quality refuge habitat. Our findings suggest that at most sites larval mussels are able to access and settle on living shoreline created marshes behind rock sill structures, but that most recruits are likely not surviving. Sediment organic matter (OM) and plant density were correlated with mussel abundance, and sediment OM increased with marsh age, suggesting that living shoreline design (e.g., sand fill, planting grids) and lags in ecosystem development (sediment properties) are reducing the survival of the young recruits. We offer potential modifications to living shoreline design and implementation practices that may facilitate self‐sustaining ribbed mussel populations in these restored habitats.

Climate change and coastal development pressures have intensified the need for shoreline protection. Nature-first approaches that use natural habitats, particularly marshes, are being promoted globally as ecologically-beneficial alternatives to grey infrastructure. The ability of these novel shorelines to provide nursery habitat to blue crab, an ecologically and economically important species along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the United States, has not been quantified. We quantified the abundance and size distribution of juvenile blue crabs from a chronosequence of living shorelines (created fringing marshes) spanning 2 to 16 years in age (since construction) and compared with paired natural fringing marshes in the southern Chesapeake Bay. Both created and natural fringing marshes are being used by blue crabs as primary nursery habitats. While there were interannual differences in abundance, young blue crabs (≤ 2.5 cm carapace width) were observed in similar densities and sizes at living shoreline and natural marshes. There was no relationship between the age of the living shoreline and blue crab density, indicating that even the youngest living shorelines (2 years) were providing primary nursery habitat. Young blue crabs were more abundant in more isolated marshes and those that were inundated for longer periods of time each tidal cycle, which may be evidence for habitat-limitation. Synthesis and applications: We provide evidence that juvenile blue crabs are comparably using natural and created fringing salt marshes as primary nursery habitat. Although the relative importance of salt marshes as young crab nursery habitat is not fully understood and likely varies by system, the value of marshes within a suite of available structural nursery habitats may increase under a changing climate. The potential for living shorelines to serve as nursery habitat for an economically important species may provide additional incentives to implement these climate adaptation strategies.