Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41536621›Full record

ReviewCambridge prisms. Coastal futures2026

Sedimentation fields as a method of saltmarsh restoration: Continuity of human influence on natural processes.

Jonathan Dale, Michelle Farrell

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cambridge prisms. Coastal futures, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Recommendations for the development of erosion-resistant tidal marshes to enhance nature-based flood risk mitigation.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2026
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jonathan DaleUniversity of Reading, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5242-8071
Michelle FarrellCoventry University, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Saltmarsh habitat provides important ecosystem services, such as water quality regulation, carbon sequestration and flood defence, but is experiencing losses globally. Historically, this has been caused by land claim, and more recently by rising sea levels. Several methods have been implemented to compensate for saltmarsh habitat loss, including realigning defences, transplanting vegetation, and building structures such as sedimentation fields to enclose areas of mudflat and encourage sediment deposition. It has been suggested that sedimentation fields may offer saltmarsh restoration without the limitations identified in other restoration approaches, such as poor drainage and anoxia caused by changes to the sediment structure due to prior human activity. In this article, we argue that restoration through sedimentation fields should be viewed as a continuation of human activity influencing natural processes, rather than a method that overcomes the influence of prior human activity on saltmarsh ecosystem functioning. This opinion is evidenced by a critical review of the (pre-)historic human activity and saltmarsh restoration attempts at Rumney Great Wharf, Severn Estuary, Wales, where sedimentation fields were constructed between 1989 and 2005 and extended in 2024. We then evaluate the research requirements that need to be addressed to ensure the successful implementation of future schemes, including further understanding of the interactions between physical and biological processes, to enhance ecosystem functioning in sites restored using sedimentation fields.

Indexed as

human influencesaltmarsh restorationsedimentation fields

Identifiers

PMID41536621
PMCPMC12797178

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.