Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41820454›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Geomorphological changes of natural and engineered vegetated foredunes since completion of Kustwerk Katwijk.

Amber Spears, Caroline Apraku, Robert W Whalin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Amber SpearsDepartment of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Tennessee State University, Nashville, USA. amber.spears@students.jsums.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0245-1046
Caroline AprakuDepartment of Environmental Sciences, Tennessee State University, Nashville, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-0584-3639
Robert W WhalinDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Industrial Systems and Technology; Director, Coastal Resilience Center of Excellence, Jackson State University, Jackson, USA.

Funding

National Science Foundation, United States 2153710U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Institute of Food and Agriculture 2022-38427-37307
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For centuries, vegetation has been utilized to enhance dune stability and provide coastal protection. Marram grass (Calamagrostis arenaria) is the most commonly transplanted species on engineered coastal dunes in the Netherlands. However, the geomorphic behavior of engineered foredunes relative to neighboring natural foredunes remains unknown. This study utilizes historical airborne laser surveys, multispectral satellite data, and 2023 field surveys to compare the spatial and temporal patterns of sand accretion and vegetation health of the dike-in-dune in Katwijk, NL, with those of the southern neighboring Berkheide from 2015 to 2023. Results show that average annual sand accretion at the Berkheide foredune was about 1.5 times as much as at the dike-in-dune. Average annual increases in vegetation health, as represented by normalized difference vegetation indices, are roughly equal and less than 0.1 at both the dike-in-dune and Berkheide foredunes. This study observed a generally positive correlation between average annual accretion and vegetation health for each foredune. However, in areas of permanent and temporary beach structures, the Berkheide dune appeared to be the most adversely impacted. This information suggests that the foredunes are growing similarly-although the dike-in-dune is engineered-which is promising for urban coastal communities with coastlines visible leeward.

Indexed as

Engineered duneForeduneGeomorphologyLiDARMarram grassNDVI

Identifiers

PMID41820454
PMCPMC13103046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.