Journal of Student Research 2017

Drivers of Hydroperiod and Ephemeral and Permanent Wetlands Table 1

53

Hydrologic Variable Minimum depth (cm) Maximum depth (cm) Range depth (cm)

EP

PW

P - value

-9.3 (6.5) 46.6 (6.0) 55.9 (6.1)

47.1 (7.6) 67.3 (9.5) 22.2 (2.5)

<0.001 0.057 0.001 0.010 0.069 0.066 0.137 0.004 0.002

4.15 (0.83) 1.29 (0.20) 0.15 (0.03) 0.09 (0.05) 1.25 (0.39) 0.55 (0.02) 0.74 (0.98) 0.61 (0.05)

Maximum fluctuation (cm/hr) Mean periodic fluctuation (cm/hr) Mean positive fluctuation (cm/hr) Mean negative fluctuation (cm/hr)

# of rising increments # of falling increments

274 (23) 417 (21)

368 (13) 319 (11)

Table 1. Comparison of hydroperiod characteristics between permanent and ephemeral ponds. Negative numbers indicate water depths below the ground surface. Although we investigated all possible relationships between our explanatory and hydrologic variables, we here report on only those showing major trends. In EPs, canopy cover was negatively related to maximum depth (Figure 3C). Seasonal range in EPs had a positive relationship with EP area (Figure 3B), but little relationship to mean peat depth (Figure 3A). For EPs, mean and maximum periodic water depth fluctuation and basin (watershed) size were positively related (Figures 3F and 3D). PWs had a negative relationship between mean periodic fluctuation and elevation (Figure 3E). Figure 3.

(A)

(B)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Range Depth (cm)

Range Depth (cm)

100.0

1000.0

10000.0

100000.0

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

Area (ha)*

Peat depth (cm)*

(D)

(C)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

0 5

0 Max Fluctuation (cm/6hr) 20000

0 Maximum Depth (cm) 20

40000

60000

80000

40

60

80

100

Canopy (%)

Basin (ha)

(E)

(F)

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

Flashiness (cm/6hr)

Flashiness (cm/6hr)

1080

1100

1120

1140

1160

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

Elevation (ft)

Basin (ha)