ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUV
1
(Attribute 1 )(Attribute 2)(Attribute 3)Restoration Background Information
2
Name of Article + URL/HyperlinkedRestoration Site LocationSpecies Diversity & CompositionSubfactor(s)Method ResultEnhanced VegetationSubfactor(s)Method ResultPhysical Conditions [y/n]Subfactor(s)Method ResultType of Site (biome)Species of EelgrassDepth of area restored (m)Source
3
Restoration #1Successful Eelgrass (Zostera marina) Restoration in a Formerly Eutrophic Estuary (Boston Harbor) Supports the Use of a Multifaceted Watershed Approach to Mitigating Eelgrass LossEelgrass Restoration Boston HarboryAbundance of key species + Trophic Level StabilizationUsed SCUBA to sample ten 1 m2 quadrats, and sampling of quadrats was delayed for a minimum of 0.5 h after placement to allow any disturbed fish and invertebrates to return to the area. diversity indices for our planted sites were comparable to or exceeded those of natural beds at Nahant and Hull and the unvegetated control site after 2 years. From 2006 to 2007, H’ index for epibenthic and demersal
fish and invertebrates increased at all sites. Nahant,
Hull, and control site data exhibited slight increases in
species number across years Trophic level: In just 2 years
of monitoring, transplanted sites met and exceeded refer�ence bed habitat function as measured by habitat structure
and epibenthic/demersal species abundance and diversity		yShoot Density + Canopy DistanceShoot density and size of randomly selected plots were measured at least once per year for the duration of the project to assess survival and expansion. Shoots were hand planted

Canopy Distance: Area restricted by suitable sediments, planted in checkerboard patterns, space in between plots but allowed for more growth		Shoot Density was based on the mean shoot density count ± standard deviation from nine randomly selected 0.25 m2 quadrats in each randomly selected sample of plots at each site. Overall, our planted sites were comparable to orexceeded the natural beds and control site after 2 years as
measured by biomass and density

Canopy Distance: Over 2 ha restored in previously degraded areas in the Harbor		ySediment Accretion + Water Turbidity Silt and Clay: We found that a silt/clay content
of <35% was a sediment characteristic at all of our
successful sites, which is lower than some values found in
the literature.

Water Turbidity: The location had undergone extensive water
quality improvements, creating conditions favorable to
eelgrass growth 		Mesotidal, fine grained sediment, urban estuary. silt/clay content of <35%Zostera Marina 4.9 m (ave)Web of Science
4
Restoration #2Restoration of seagrass habitat leads to rapid recovery of coastal ecosystem servicesEelgrass Restoration in East Coast of the U.S. Delmarva Peninsula within this Peninsula is the South Bay, Cobb Bay, Spider Crab Bay, Hog Island Bay yAbundance of key species + Trophic Level StabilizationMentions a restoration of fish species, epifaunal invertebrate biomass, finfish biomass increased rapidly. Also a mention of a mix of crustacean, decapod, and gastrapod species. These were just observed, no mention of actual methods Key Species: Talked about the importance, measured in MT Epifaunal invertebrate communities contained a diverse mix of crustacean, decapod, and gastropod species and Fish communities were likewise characterized by a rich and abundant assemblage dominated largely by silver perch (Bairdiella chrysoura). The next most abundant fish was pinfish (Lagodon rhomboides), a subtropical species that has been historically rare north of Cape Hatteras.

Trophic level stabilization of both fish predators and their epifaunal prey through time suggests that the bed has reached a mature and stable state with respect to a diverse and abundant food web.		yCanopy DistancePlanted high density of seeds in small plots, allowing them to grow and spreadAble to resotre up to 3612 ha of seagrass when the plots were 213 haySediment Accretion + Organic Carbon and/or Nitrogen Stocks ( / accumulation)Water Turbidity: Increasing bed area and seagrass density within the restored meadow during the first 5 years of seagrass restoration were associated with a marked decrease in summertime turbidity levels as measured continuously every 15 min at a fixed station located within the restored meadow

Sediment nutrient stocks: measurements were taken in beds of varying ages and these values were matched with the corresponding year since the beginning of the restoration. A) Net sediment carbon stocks. (B) Net sediment nitrogen stocks (net stock = seagrass sediment stock − unvegetated sediment stock).		Water Turbidity: Multiple regression revealed a significant negative relationship between total area of the bed surrounding the station and mean turbidity after accounting for year (after log-log transformation; β = −0.69, R2 = 0.42). On graph of mean turbidity by year there appears to be an average turbidity of about14-15 NTU between the years 2012-2016

C/N Stocks: Through time, carbon and nitrogen content in the mature seagrass sediments (>9 years) were 1.3× and 2.2× greater, respectively, than carbon and nitrogen content in the newly colonized sediments (1 to 5 years), suggesting that this storage capacity is increasing with meadow age.		Inshore lagoonsZostera Marina Shallow (not disclosed) Web of Science
5
Restoration #3Large‐Scale Zostera marina (eelgrass) Restoration in Chesapeake Bay, Maryland, USA. Part I: A Comparison of Techniques and Associated Costs Restoration in Chesapeake Bay, Maryland, USA (seagrass)nyCanopy Distance25.5 ha of bottom were seeded with nearly 13 million Z. marina seeds between 2004 and 2008nZostera Marina Shallow (not disclosed) Web of Science
6
Restoration #4 Seagrass Restoration Is Possible: Insights and Lessons From Australia and New ZealandAustralia and New Zealand SeagrassyAbundance of key species oyster reefs have been shown to facilitate seagrass productivity through a variety of mechanismsOyster reefs enhance conditions for seagrass growth through provision of physical protection from wave action (Piazza et al., 2005), improve water clarity through filtering particulate organic matter (Plutchak et al., 2010), and increase sedimentation and nutrient inputs through addition of fecesyExpansion / ConnectivityConsequently, selecting genetically diverse meadow(s) as a donor source is important for maximizing restoration success. Previous studies also indicate that genetic diversity is positively correlated with seagrass-related community species richness and productivity Nsays Z.marina can live in up to 2 m Web of Science
7
Restoration #5The greenhouse gas offset potential from seagrass restoration
nyShoot Density + Expansion / ConnectivityShoot densities ranged from approximately 250 to 617 shoots m−2 in South Bay due to seasonal thinning and export, and biomass ranged from 0.26 to 0.781 gdw shoot−1. W. The average density over the course of a year was approximately half of the peak density observed during July (48%) Expansion: Cumulative GPP increased by 114% between 2013 and 2016, due largely to meadow expansion, but the enhanced sequestered stock only increased by 78% over this period.yOrganic Carbon or Nitrogen Stocks ( / accumulation)Despite tripling the N2O flux to 0.06 g m−2 yr−1 and increasing CH4 8-fold to 0.8 g m−2 yr−1, the meadow now offsets 0.42 tCO2e ha−1 yr−1, which is roughly equivalent to the seagrass sequestration rate for GHG inventory accounting but lower than the rates for temperate and tropical forests. The meadow-wide, net sediment Corg sequestration attributable to the restoration increased from 1,130 t Corg in 2013 to 2,010 t in 2016 (Table 3; Fig. 3).Web of Science
8
Restoration #6Blue carbon stocks in Baltic Sea eelgrass (Zostera marina) meadowsFinland and Denmark: Baltic Sea areaNyShoot Density" In thevicinity of each sediment core, shoot density was counted using a 0.25 m2 frame, and above- and belowground biomass samples were collected with a corer (diameter 19.7 cm) and bagged underwater"Shoot density at both sites were roughly equal at around 417 ± 75 (shoots m−2) in Finland and around 418 ± 32 (shoots m−2) in Denmark. yOrganic Carbon or Nitrogen Stocks ( / accumulation)"In our study, the Finnish eelgrass meadows showed consistently very low Corg stocks and Corg accumulation, and the meadows were minor carbon sinks compared to the Danish meadows"depth of 2.5-3m, mineral sediments, from clear saline waters to brackish waters, steep environmental gradientsZostera Marina 2.5-3m Web of Science
9
Restoration #7Long-term performance of seagrass restoration projects in Florida, USAFloridayGenetic Diversity + Abundance of key species "Mentions the diversity in seagrasses in the 33 sites they visited ""Among sites comparatively evaluated for seagrass diversity (n=29), inverse Simpson diversity index (1/λ) ranged
from 1.00 to 1.76 in restored beds (mean=1.21±0.04) and 1.00 to 2.05 in reference beds (mean=1.28±0.06)"" "		Seagrass diversity in restorations was 3.0±3.2% lower than references on average, with a paired mean dif�ference of −0.07 (95% CI=−0.10, −0.03) Key Species: seagrass community dissimilarity was primarily driven by a greater relative abundance of H. wrightii and a lower
relative abundance of T. testudinum and Syringodium fliforme in restored beds in comparison to reference beds
(Fig. 5A,B; Table 3). Diferences in the relative abundance of these three species contributed to 77.8% of the
cumulative compositional dissimilarity between restored and reference beds (Table 3).		yCanopy DistanceWhen compared by restoration type, seagrass
percent cover in restored beds was signifcantly lower than reference beds in 62% (8/13) of sediment modifca�tion and in 73% (8/11) of transplant sites		n6 different species but only these were mentionedTalassia testudinum and Halodule wrightii NAWeb of Science
10
Restoration #8Assessment of the establishment success of eelgrass Zostera marina (Alismatales: Zosteraceae) from seeds in a cost-effective seed protection method: implications for large-scale restorationn Swan Lake (37°21′N, 122°34′E) on the eastern coast of Shandong Peninsula, ChinanyShoot DensityThe shoot density of Z. marina showed a clear seasonal variation with high values in September of both yearsThe results were also approximately equal to the shoot densities in the previous study reported by Zhang et al. (2015), who evaluated a seed protection method for Z. marina seed distribution at Swan Lake and found an average shoot density of 361 shoots m-2 in September (11 months after planting). The results of our study indicate that the seed bag method without sediment for the dispersal of Z. marina seeds is an efficient technique for growing Z. marina from seedntidal lagoon, area of 4.94 km2 , and separated from open sea. Fine grained material, mud, and sandy mudZostera Marinamean water depth was about 1.0 m Web of Science
11
Restoration #9Rhizome starch as indicator for temperate seagrass winter survivalOosterschelde Delta, The NetherlandsyTrophic Level Stabilizationna We found that next year's transplant success could not be predicted based on the preceding year's growth success, emphasizing the winter as a crucial period for survival of seagrass transplants.y% Survival + Shoot Density If shoot numbers were <15% of the shoot numbers in the preceding year, plots were marked as unsuccessful. Survival Rate: We found that next year's transplant success could not be predicted based on the preceding year's growth success, emphasizing the winter as a crucial period for survival of seagrass transplants.nrelatively stable sediments such as clay banks, saltmarsh remnants and natural shell layersZostera noltii,intertidal, surface area of 351 km2, a tidal amplitude of 2.5–3 m Web of Science
12
Restoration #10Developing success criteria for restored eelgrass, salt marsh and mud flat habitatsPort ofNew Hampshire.yTrophic Level StabilizationHabitat, refuge, nursery, and settlement; support of fisheriesyShoot DensityUsed as SCThe indicators shoot density and LAI, both measures of canopy structure, show very similar performance on the yardstick of success (Fig. 2); dropping of LAI, as suggested above, would not affect the results. The CV’s for biomass and density, based on only two reference sites, were higher than the 0.2 target during some yearsnEstuaryZostera marinaN/AWeb of Science
13
Restoration #11The Value of Long-Term Assessment of Restoration: Support from a Seagrass InvestigationGreat Bay Estuary. Near Tampa
Bay, Florida, U.S.A.		ny% Survival + Canopy Distance y 2008, substantial seagrass spillover, contiguous with over 75% of plots, was recorded. Canopy distance: In contrast to earlier years, many plots not only devel�oped substantial levels of seagrass cover (>70%) after 2005,
but also sustained these levels through 2009. 		nSalt marsh Halodule wrightiiN/AWeb of Science
14
Restoration #12Restoring eelgrass, Zostera marina L., habitat using a new transplanting technique: The horizontal rhizome methodGreat Bay Estuary, New HamsphireyAbundance of Invasive / Undesirable SpeciesBiological disturbance caused most of the subtidal losses of transplants. We success- fully protected the transplanted eelgrass against crab bioturbation, but were surprised to discover severe bioturbation by clam worms affecting some subtidal areas.y% Survival + Shoot Density For annual sampling of eelgrass characteristics, a 100 m primary transect was placed
within each control bed and transplanted bed, across which four 20 m secondary
transects were laid perpendicularly at 33 m intervals. Knots were located every meter
along the 20 m transects to indicate sampling points, and two points along each
secondary transect within the eelgrass bed were randomly selected for sampling 		Eelgrass shoot density increased at all three
transplant sites, and surpassed that of the control site within two years (which was 100 shoots m^-2 _+ 11.6). Shoot density at one transplant site (234 shoots m−2 ± SE 52.0) exceeded that of the control site (162 shoots m−2 ± 20.6) within 1 yr of transplanting. %Survival: Survival rates, as high as 98% at several subtidal sites, and habitat development of eelgrass transplanted using the horizontal rhizome method equal or exceed those reported with other methods.		nEstuaryZostera marinaWeb of Science
15
Restoration #13Copper treatment during storage reduces Phytophthora and Halophytophthora infection of Zostera marina seeds used for restorationthis was a lab experament. Seeds for experament were collected at the Garman barrier island Syltn y% SurvivalLarge numbers of seed may be lost due to predation15,34, bioturbation35 and currents and waves36.nEel grass meadowZostera marina and Zostera noltiinaPubMed
16
Restoration #14Conservation of eelgrass (Zostera marina) genetic diversity in a mesocosm-based restoration experimentRomberg Tirburon Center for Environmental Studies, central San Fransisco BayyGenetic Diversity + Abundance of key species Useful for many costal commuites. Important fish, waterfowl, manatees, dugongs, sea turtles. Community Rest: are a foundational species for many costal communities Genetic Diversity: As dense as possible. Higher genetic diversity has been positively correlated with rates of sexual reproduction, vegetative propagation, and overall shoot density [26], and hence may contribute to the success of individual restoration efforts.nnmesocosmsZostra Marina42cmPubMed
17
Restoration #15Heavy metal accumulation and phytoremediation potential by transplants of the seagrass Zostera marina in the polluted bay systemsKorean Coasts: Jaran Bay and Onsan Bay nnySediment AccretionIn conclusion, the sediments of the polluted bay systems were contaminated by different heavy metals, which were As, Cu, Fe, and Pb in Jaran Bay, and Cd, Co, Zn, and Hg in Onsan Bay. The high metals concentrations in the Z. marina transplant tissues reflected the metal concentrations in sediments of the transplant sites, suggesting that Z. marina transplants could take up the heavy metals from sediments and accumulate them into their tissues.r Tampa
Bay, Florida, U.S.A.		Z. Marina7–10 m depthPubMed
18
Restoration #16Restoration #16Swan Lake (Yuehu) ChinanyShoot DensityThe shoot density of Z. marina under different planting densities showed a lower value in sampling months from May to July and a rapid increase in sampling months from July to September 2011ntidal lagoon, mud and sandy mudZ. Marina100cmPubMed
19
Restoration #17Salinity and temperature significantly influence seed germination, seedling establishment, and seedling growth of eelgrass Zostera marina LLab near Swan Lake (Yuehu) Chinany% Survivalthey tracted germination rate within the seeds. they also tracked seedling growth.15C is ideal, 0% salinity is ideal for seeds. Higher salinities were better for promoting growth of seedlings, 30ppt seemed ideanpetri dishesZ. MarinanaPubMed
20
Restoration #18An effective transplanting technique using shells for restoration of Zostera marina habitatsKoje Bay, Southern Koreany% Survival + Shoot Density Survival rate metric: The mean survival rate of eelgrass transplants using the horizontal rhizome method, in which two shoots were secured horizontally into the sediment using a bamboo staple, was 71%The transplant shoot density declined during the first 2–3 months following transplantation due to the initial transplant shock, and then surviving shoots became established at the sites and produced new lateral shoots after these periods. Plant size and leaf productivity of transplants 7 months post-transplanting were similar to or exceeded those of pre-existed shootsnsilt loamZ. Marina400cmPubMed
21
Restoration #19Recovery and Community Succession of the Zostera marina Rhizobiome after TransplantationOregon CoastyAbundance of key species + Trophic Level StabilizationKey Species: Our results indicate that Zostera marina rhizobiome communities are distinct, linked to seagrass performance, and resilient to disturbance. Indeed, eelgrass belowground traits suffered negatively from undergoing

Trophic Stab: further, our results show that several taxa that may benefit the plant directly or enhance turnover of nutrients in sediments are enriched in seagrass-associated compartments after transplantation.
yShoot DensityLeeaf length, Rhizome Length, Leaf Biomass, Rhizome Biomass, Root Biomass, Root Length, Rhizosphere Mass. Soil Mass.

Reslience to Disturbance: Researchers washed the transplanted plants before planting them and observed how they did compared to the unwashed plants 		Compared transplants that has been washed and transplanted that were left undisturbed. Resilience to Disturbance: It looks like the difference between washing and not washing is minimal, there are good graphs in the paperySediment Accretion + Organic Carbon and/or Nitrogen Stocks ( / accumulation)Sediment: med across sub-millimeter ranges by plant metabolic processes (40). These results are supported by previous observations (19, Wang et al., submitted for publication) and a proposed model of microbiome assembly via selection of bulk sediment microbes

Nutrient: Our work further distinguishes the root-attached microbiome as different from the microbiota of the rhizosphere, and suggests that these two compartments are separate microbial niches shaped by prevailing redox and nutrient gradients formed across sub-millimeter ranges by plant metabolic processes		sandy mudZ. MarinaPubMed
22
Restoration #20Integrating genetics, biophysical, and demographic insights identifies critical sites for seagrass conservationSweedish West CoastyGenetic Diversity They measured the genetic diversity of the eelgrass through a multitud of different approachesmore diversity makes for a healthier and more resiliant populationnnsandZ. MarinaPubMed
23
Restoration #21Dependence of eelgrass (Zostera marina) light requirements on sediment organic matter in Massachusetts coastal bays: implications for remediation and restorationCape Cod, MassachusettsyTrophic Level StabilizationVariation in how flushing affects nitrogen loading and seagrass metabolism may also be leading to differences in the abundance of grazers, epiphytes growing on the seagrass, and macroalgal abundance, hence differences in leaf shading that could lead to variation in eelgrass depth distributions.yShoot Density + Canopy DistanceThis scientifically peer reviewed mapping program provided a reliable source of data for assessing temporal changes in the distribution and abundance of eelgrass in a time frame relevant to documentation of nitrogen impairment.increased abundanceyOrganic Carbon or Nitrogen Stocks ( / accumulation)reduced organic carbon hinders plants ability to nutralize sulfide and ammonium toxcicity. Muddy Sediements. 5-13% organic matter. Z. Marinadepends on soil carbon content and sediment in water. Usually less than 300 cmPubMed
24
Restoration #22Impact of eelgrass bed recovery and expansion on phytoplankton growth through nutrient competitionNorthern Hiroshima Bay, JapanyAbundance of Invasive / Undesirable Speciesphytoplankton prevent light attenuation and competition for nutrientsin high nutrient areas, eelgrass expanded and kept phytoplankton from overgrowing

to prevent excessive phytoplankton growth by uptaking nutrients in the warm season near the coast with macrophyte. The macrophyte subsequently die and gradually discharge nutrients by decomposition in the cold season. These discharged nutrients support primary production in the cold season, but do not lead to excess growth of phytoplankton.		yExpansion / Connectivityeelgrass expansion reduced phytoplankton population sizesyOrganic Carbon or Nitrogen Stocks ( / accumulation)Dissolved inorganic nitrogen
(DIN) and phosphorus (DIP) concentrations were higher in March–April


Z. Marinaaverage water depth of about 18 mPubMed
25
Restoration #23Restoring Resiliency: Case Studies from Pacific Northwest Estuarine Eelgrass (Zostera marina L.) EcosystemsWashington State: Grays Harbor,
Eagle Harbor, Clinton		yAbundance of Invasive / Undesirable Speciesthe elimination of eelgrass at Eagle Harbor by a seaweed mat points to the persistent stressors at the site and, using the terminology of resilience, the precariousness of the newly established systemy% Survival + Shoot Density
documented the effects of shifting, small-scale bathymetry on the shape and persistence of patches of eelgrass. We concluded that eelgrass in the pools was stable and should persist for the long term as long as the pools were maintained to prevent intense drying at low tides in summer. 		eelgrass density generally increased in five of the pools for the first 5 years, then declined in all pools by year 6 until they normalized
[Annual variation in eelgrass shoot density in four reference sampling plots ranged from 5- to over 20-fold in shoot density10-years. maximum densities increased with decreasing depth of the sites (probably driven by variation in light levels), BUT all sites regardless of depth showed a high degree of variation over the 10-year period (Fig. 6). We found that the lowest shoot densities occurred during periods when mean sea surface temperature was at the upper or lower temperature extreme and that the greatest densities occurred at intermediate temperatures ]

The dynamics of the shape and depth of the pools, and ultimately, the persistence of eelgrass were controlled by hydrodynamic forcing, and eelgrass adjusted to the changing shape by rhizome growth and seed germination. Data show that eelgrass can recover from major shifts in pond position and shape on sandflats, as well as natural disturbances causing >20-fold change in density. 		ySediment Accretion + Water TurbidityResilience to disturbance: The loss - but further recovery -- of eelgrass after unusual turbidity events and sediment erosion/deposition demonstrate the resilience of those meadows → perhaps because the conditions did not persist at these sites, populations had the ability to recover.Estuary, protected embayment, open nearshore
beach		Zostera marina L. (shoots)Google Scholar
26
Restoration #24Blue Restoration – Building Confidence and Overcoming BarriersChesapeake Bay, United StatesyAbundance of Invasive / Undesirable Species Pest species can reduce the survival and persistence of restored blue ecosystems. For example, Crown-of-Thorns starfish (Acanthaster planci) and Indo-Pacific lionfish (Pterois volitans) have threatened reef restoration projects in Australia and the Caribbean, respectively (Omori, 2010), green crabs (Carcinus maenas) have reduced survival of restored seagrass (Davis et al., 1998), sea urchins have damaged kelp restoration projectsygenetic diversity***Large-scale restoration using seeds collected from areas adjacent to Chesapeake Bay was initiated in the late 1990s Seed-based restoration provides a greater abundance of genetically diverse propagules. Currently, 72 million seeds have been added between 1999 and 2015, to plots ranging in size from 0.01 to 2 ha, totaling 200 ha across four coastal baysyWater Turbidity + Organic Carbon and/or Nitrogen Stocks ( / accumulation) Eutrophication (excess nutrient loads resulting in significant reductions in dissolved oxygen) is one of the most prominent cause of seagrass loss (Waycott et al., 2009), and has also contributed to loss of oyster reefs (Beck et al., 2011). Seagrass restoration in the Wadden Sea was more feasible with a higher likelihood of success at sites where eutrophication and turbidity had been improved in the late 1980s, after extensive seagrass losses had occurredZostera MarinaGoogle Scholar
27
Restoration #25Eelgrass Meadows Return to Frenchy's Cove, Anacapa Island: Recovery Ten Years after Successful TransplantationSocal; Frenchy's Cove, Anacapa Island (near Channel islands)yAbundance of key species + Abundance of Invasive/Undesirable + Genetic DiversityFrom 2005 to 2012, we measured white urchin density within fifteen 0.25-m2 quadrats placed along the shallow transect. We searched the sediment, eelgrass, and drift material in order to capture cryptic urchins or recent recruits.

Ddensity and species abundance of associated benthic invertebrates and fishes were surveyed annually along each transect from 2003 to 2012.
Increased diversity and abundance of invertebrates and fishes were evident, with an average of 5 (2001), 9 (2005), and 14 (2011) fish species recorded during 30-minute surveys and a dramatic shift in fish guilds, with black perch, pile perch, and halfmoon only associated with the new meadow GD: A high degree of genotype sharing in geographically separated Z. marina meadows along Santa Catalina Island was due to reattachment of dislodged rhizomes (Coyer et al. 2008), demonstrating that vegetative fragments are redistributed and can colonize new areas.yShoot Density + Expansion / ConnectivityBetween the 4 meadows, shoot density ranged from a mean high of 169 m–2 at Scorpion Anchorage in 2001 to a mean low of 39 m–2 at Frenchy’s Cove in 2009.

shoots presently ranging from 7- to 10-m depth along >60 m of shoreline;

nZostera PacificaGoogle Scholar
28
Restoration #26Assessing establishment success of Zostera marina transplants through measurements of shoot morphology and growthJindong Bay on the southern coast of KoreanyShoot Density Shoot density, individual shoot weight, productivity, and morphological characteristics of transplants and reference plants in the vicinity of the planting site were monitored monthly for 13 months.

DENSITY: estimated by counting the number of shoots inside a haphazardly placed quadrat (0.5 × 0.5 m; n = 4), and the measurements were converted to shoots per unit area values (shoots m−2).

MORPHOLOGY: measured using terminal shoots of both transplants and reference population. number of leaves was counted from the upper end of the sheath, and shoot height was measured from the meristem to the longest leaf tip. Leaf width at the middle of the longest leaf was measured to the nearest 0.1 mm. Rhizome diameter of each internode (from the first to the sixth internode, counted from the meristem) was also measured to nearest 0.1 mm. The average diameter along the six internodes was used to represent rhizome diameter)

WEIGHT: All tissues of plant samples were dried at 60 °C for 48 h to obtain above- and below-ground tissue weight

PRODUCTIVITY: plastochrone method		shoot size of transplants was smaller than that of reference plants at the start, the individual shoot weight, leaf width, shoot height, and rhizome diameter of transplants increased rapidly, surpassing those of reference plants @ 5 month marknsubtidal area, loam sedimentZostera Marina1.0 m below MLLWweb of Science
29
Restoration #27Evaluating a Large Scale Eelgrass Restoration Project in the Chesapeake Bay Piney Point (PP) in the lower Potomac River estuary in the Chesapeake Bay (mid‐Atlantic coast of North America)yTrophic Level Stabilization + Abundance of Invasive / Undesirable SpeciesHabitat quality and restoration success were monitored for the 2005 plantings and compared to a nearby restoration site (St. George Island [SGI]).

Epiphytes: plants were photographed to qualitatively assess health and epiphyte loads. PLL also takes into account the attenuation of light from epiphyte loads on leaf surfaces based on the availability of dissolved nutrients that stimulate the growth of epiphytic algae		Poor Resilience to temporary/diurnal variation: Initial survival was high for the 2003 and 2004 plantings; however, most of the eelgrass died during the summer following the fall planting. --> [ Eelgrass planted at PP in the fall of 2005 declined through the summer of 2006 with some recovery in the spring of 2007, but was gone by the end of the summer of 2007. The summer decline from late July to mid‐August of 2006 coincided with water temperatures greater than 30°C, hypoxic oxygen (0–3 mg/L) concentrations, and low percent light at leaf level (PLL < 15%) ]

Epiphyte loads were much heavier at PP than at SGI, despite similar water quality. We suggest that this was the result of higher wave exposure at PP.		yShoot Density + Expansion / Connectivity + Survival RateMaximum shoot density: calculated by placing a 12‐cm diameter ring on the densest area of the plant plot along the north–south or east–west line and counting the number of shoots.

Clump area (to assess growth and expansion): length measurements were collected using a 0.4‐m2 quadrant that was marked like a compass, with strings running north to south, east to west, northwest to southeast, and northeast to southwest. A marker was placed in the center of each clump, and using a compass, a diver placed the quadrate in the same place and took eight measurements. The distance that plants extended along the eight coordinates was used to calculate the area.		By June 2006, the initial PUs had vegetatively propagated (ramet formation) forming clumps that reached sizes approaching 1 m2 (clumps in the deeper subplots were significantly denser and had significantly taller plants by late July) and with maximum shoot densities as high as 5,500 shoots/m2, densities similar or greater than peak eelgrass shoot densities reported for the Chesapeake Bay

Survival: Survival of eelgrass PUs planted in 2003 was 34% after 1 month, 26% after 6 months, and less than 10% after 1 year. Survival for the 2004 PUs was 50% after 1 month, 38% after 6 months, and 0% after 1 year.
Of the original 15,000 PUs placed at PP in October 2005, 73% survived for 6 months (through June 2006).
yWater Turbidity + Organic Carbon and/or Nitrogen Stocks ( / accumulation)Organic content and nitrogen concentrations at both the PP and SGI restoration sites were similar to that at the eelgrass restoration site at JS and significantly lower than the natural eelgrass meadow at DM. Schenk and Rybicki (2006) suggested that the low sediment nitrogen content could have limited the growth and survival of eelgrass transplants at JS

Water Turbidity: The planting site at PP had calculated wave heights (WHs) (max WH = 0.466 m, avg WH = 0.270 m) similar to the natural eelgrass meadow at DM, Virginia (max WH = 0.466 m, avg WH = 0.260 m), but greater than the calculated WHs at SGI (max WH = 0.181 m, avg WH = 0.148 m).		Zostera MarinaGoogle Scholar
30
Restoration #28Assessing establishment success of Zostera marina transplants through measurements of shoot morphology and growthNW coast of Sweden yyShoot Density Seasonal variation in shoot numbers was seen at all sites, with a decrease in shoot numbers occurring over the winter. Between October 2011 and May 2012, average shoot numbers in plots decreased with 59 and 64% in the exposed shallow and deep respectively and by 76% in both sheltered sites (Fig. 3a) This trend was also visible when examining the complete loss of all shoots within plots, which was largest over the winter yOrganic Carbon or Nitrogen Stocks ( / accumulation)Water column NH4+ concentration was highest (4.9 μM) in June 2007 and lowest (0.6 μM) in December 2006 (Fig. 3A). NO3− + NO2− concentration was highest (7.3 μM) in December 2006, and lowest (0.6 μM) in June 2007 (Fig. 3B), showing a variation pattern nearly opposite that for NH4+ concentration.Zostera MarinaPlant material was reciprocally transplanted between 4 habitat sites (shallow and deep sites within a sheltered and exposed location) to determine factors affecting growth and establishment success of transplantsGoogle scholar
31
Restoration #29Global analysis of seagrass restoration: the importance of large‐scale plantingno general location, this is a write up of a separate meta-analysis that was madeyAbundance of Invasive / Undesirable Speciesremoval of threats (no threats, complete removal, partial removal), distance from donor site (<1 km, 1–10 km, 10–50 km, >50 km)y% Survivalsurvial rates were split into 3 categories : (i) first 9 months; (ii) between 10 and 22 months (thus including minimally one adverse season); and (iii) more than 22 months (thus including 2 adverse seasons)After 23 months, estimated survival of small trials was 22% (<100 shoots/seeds planted), but trial survival increased to 42% for the largest scale trials (>100 000 shoots/seeds planted, Fig. 3a).nZostera MarinaGoogle scholar
32
Restoration #30Assessing the CO2 capture potential of seagrass restoration projectsnnyCarbon ( / CO2) SequestrationHence, the estimates of CO2 sequestration used here were derived from the mean and standard deviation of the net community metabolism of seagrass meadows derived from a recent synthesis The cumulative CO2 sequestered after 50 years with 100 planting units ha−1 ranged from 177 to over 1337 tons CO2 ha−1the cumulative CO2 sequestered after 50 years with 100 planting units ha−1 ranged from 177 to over 1337 tons CO2 ha−1 C. nodosa, H. wrightii, S. filiforme, Z. marina and Z. noltii Google scholar
33
Restoration #31Assessment of the establishment success of Zostera marina (eelgrass) from seeds in natural waters: Implications for large-scale restorationSwan Lake (Yuehu) on the eastern coast of Shandong Peninsula, ChinanyShoot DensityNew plants from the seeds were fully developed and well maintained 2 years after distribution with the maximum shoot density of 2661 shoots m−2.naquaculture systemZostera MarinaGoogle scholar
34
Restoration #32Open Coast Seagrass Restoration. Can We Do It? Large Scale Seagrass Transplants Marine Park in PortugalyTrophic Level StabilizationGrazing by S. salpa has been identified to have a top down control on seagrass meadows modifying habitat structure (Pagès et al., 2012) and has been shown to limit seagrass in MPA settings in the Mediterranean. grazing pressure would not be a key factor hindering seagrass persistence because grazing pressure would have been widely distributed.y% Survival + Canopy Distance The 2009 winter storm moved sediments and decreased water clarity for many weeks, which might have been a major factor causing plant disappearance in both transplanted sites and donor population, as turbidity limits photosynthesis, a key factor for plant survival (Carr et al., 2010). Seagrass meadows were known to exist in our study site, covering 10 ha of seabed, indicating that even with seasonal storms the meadows were able to recover naturally.

The interesting observation that only the largest (11 m2) transplanted plot of Z. marina persisted over a long time, increasing to 103 m2 in 8 years, overcoming storms and grazing, raised the hypothesis that for a successful shift to a vegetated state it might be necessary to overpass a minimum critical size or tipping point.
nThe coastline is rocky with high cliffs, punctuated by occasional sandy bays. These bays, with low organic content in the sediment, include the previous seagrass areaZostera MarinaGoogle scholar
35
Restoration #33Seagrass recovery in the Delmarva Coastal Bays, USA☆Delmarva Peninsula, southern coastal bays, USA which extend approximately 200 km from Delaware Bay to ChesapeakeyAbundance of key species An immediate effect of the loss of Z. marina was the elimination of the commercial bay scallop (A. irradians) fishery in 1933 (Table 1) and disappearance of brant (B. bernicla) that fed exclusively on Z. marina.yCanopy DistanceSeagrass beds were categorized as very sparse, sparse, moderate, or dense based on a visual comparison with a scale based on percent cover estimates (Paine, 1981, Orth et al., 2004). In this paper, we collapse the four categories into sparse (0–40%) and moderate to dense (40–100%) By 2003, 7319 ha of seagrass were present in seven coastal bays, an average increase of 305 ha year−1, with 50% of the beds classified as moderate to dense and 50% as sparse. Preliminary analysis, based on a photographic resolution of 31 cm2, of these aerial photographs of the 52–0.4 ha plots in the southern coastal bays revealed an average 38% canopy coverage by Z. marina within the plots after less than four years.ySediment AccretionIn addition, shorelines that were once protected by the wave-baffling and sediment-stabilizing effects of leaves, roots, and rhizomes, sustained significant erosion of sediments after the loss of seagrassesback barrier island lagoons and salt marshes. The lagoons are characterized by extensive shallow (intertidal to 1 m MLW) shoals drained by deeper channelszostera marina∼0.5 to 1.5 mGoogle scholar
36
Restoration #34Restoring Eelgrass (Zostera marina L.) Habitats Using a Simple and Effective Transplanting Technique Huiquan Bay (120.339°E, 36.053°N; transplant site) and Qingdao Bay (120.318°E, 36.059°N; reference site) in Qingdao City, Shandong Province, ChinayAbundance of Invasive / Undesirable SpeciesIn August, the reproductive shoots totally disappeared, and epiphytic algae attached to the eelgrass leaves increased. y% Survival + Shoot Density . Shoot density (shoots m−2) at the transplant sites was measured using a 30 cm ×30 cm quadrat, with 5–6 replicates randomly selected. SURVIVAL %: Davis & Short [16] developed the horizontal rhizome method in which two shoots in opposite directions are secured horizontally into the sediment using a bamboo staple; and transplantation in the intertidal and subtidal zones results in high survival rates of 75–99% after a year. During the 2012 evaluation period, shoot density of transplanted eelgrass ranged from 220 to 481 shoots m−2 (Figure 2). Density of the plants at the 2009 transplant site peaked in the middle of June (425 shoots m−2) and in late September (393 shoots m−2). For the 2010 transplant site, the density peaks also appeared in the middle of June (411 shoots m−2) and late September (481 shoots m−2). On June 20, 2012, the shoot density reached 348±51 shoots m−2 and shoot height averaged 71.2±26.8 cm; both of these values were similar to those at the 2009 and 2010 transplant sites (one-way ANOVA; p>0.05).

In the middle of September, the number of lateral shoots increased significantly, indicating that the eelgrass had started vegetative reproduction. In late September, the new lateral shoots grew. In October, macroalgae began to attach to the leaves of the new shoots. In November, old shoots defoliated and some disappeared. They were replaced by new shoots with less algae attached to them.		n both are open gulfs with a semidiurnal tidezostera marinaGoogle scholar
37
Restoration #35Effect of silt and clay percentage in sediment on the survival and growth of eelgrass Zostera marina: Transplantation experiment in Swan Lake on the eastern coast of Shandong Peninsula, ChinaYAbundance of Invasive / Undesirable Species The results may indicate that no critical physical and biological disturbances to the transplants in our research site exist because the Swan Lake had been established as a National Seagrass Natural Reserve in 1988. y% Survival + Shoot Density Shoot Density: Transplants were still present in 2012 and proliferated to such an extent with an average shoot density of 388 shoots m−2 from August to October 2012

% Survival: The survival rate of Z. marina transplants were 100%.		ySediment AccretionSilt and clay content of the sediment affects nearly all biological and chemical properties and functions of the sediment. silt and clay content jointly serve as a major function in determining seagrass distribution, growth, and abundanc --> this study was conducted with different percentage of clay per group. The most suitable percentage of silt and clay in the sediment required by the transplants of Z. marina was 75%. The results also showed that no negative effects of lower silt sediments on Z. marina transplants were found. The silt and clay content of the sediment is important and critical to the success of seagrass transplantatio
38
Restoration #36Increasing density of juvenile Atlantic (Gadus morhua) and Greenland cod (G. ogac) in association with spatial expansion and recovery of eelgrass (Zostera marina) in a coastal nursery habitatNewfoundland, CanadayTrophic Level StabilizationWe conducted bi-weekly sampling of juvenile fish densities at 12 sites from July to November annually, 1995–2006, by seine netting.Density of age-0 cod among all sites was highly variable (from 0 to 1300 fish/880 m2) among the 11 years of our study. Among recovery and expansion eelgrass sites, juvenile cod densities increased as the percentage of eelgrass increased, irrespective of the original vegetative condition of the siteyCanopy DistanceThe study included two “recovery” sites from which an area of ~ 500 m2 eelgrass was completely removed in 1999 and 2000 by Laurel et al., 2003a, Laurel et al., 2003b, but had since regrown from 43% up to 94% coverage by 2006.nZostera Marina Google scholar
39
Restoration #37Seagrass restoration enhances "blue carbon" sequestration in coastal watersVirginia Coast Reserve Long Term Ecological Research site (VCR LTER) on the Eastern Shore of Virginia - Hog Island Bay (HI) (37°24’47″ N, 75°43’36″ W) and South Bay (SB) (37°, 15’ 54″ N, 75°48’50″ W)nyShoot DensityAnnual monitoring - for each age treatment, 6 plots were selected for sediment core sampling, except in the 0-year (SB) treatment, where 4 plots were sampled.Seagrass shoot densities increased significantly with bed age, where 4-year treatments averaged to 123.2 shoots m-2 and 10-year treatment averaged to 428.7 shoots m-2 ySediment Accretion + Organic Carbon and/or Nitrogen Stocks ( / accumulation)Accumulation of sediment over time allowed for a sediment accretion and carbon accumulation rate to be calculated as a result of the seagrass restorationCarbon accumulation rates increased over time following the seeding, with a rapid acceleration in accretion rates starting 5 years following the seeding as the seagrass density increased. For the 10-year treatment, the seagrass accumulated approximately 36.68 (± 2.79) g C m-2 yr-1 (Figure 3).Zostera marina1.2mPubMed
40
Restoration #38Site-specific success of three transplanting methods and the effect of planting time on zostera marina transplantsKorean peninsula - Koje Bay site Kosung Bay site Jindong Bay site ny% Survival + Shoot Density The shoot density of transplants at the planting sites was monitored monthly by counting the number of surviving shoots in each of the four plots

Transplant survival rates were calculated as the percentage of plants that survived after the time required for the establishment of eelgrass transplants that occurred 1–4 months following transplantation
Varied in all 3 sites and all 3 methods --> see notes

"The staple method resulted in the highest survival rate at all three sites
- In all trials, transplants planted during summer had much lower survival rates than those planted during fall to spring - The survival rates of transplants planted during fall to spring were usually >60%, except at the Koje Bay site using the shell method. However, the optimal transplanting time that produced the highest survival rates varied by site and transplanting method (see notes) "
nsand silt and clayZostera marina3 mPubMed
41
Restoration #39Positive Feedbacks in Seagrass Ecosystems: Implications for Success in Conservation and RestorationThe Wadden SeanyShoot DensityThe population will crash if shoot densities are below the unstable equilibrium, which is between both stable equilibria at a density of 988 sh m−2. Above this threshold, the population will stabilize to the carrying capacity (3,370 sh m−2).ySediment Accretion + Water TurbidityWe analyzed the influence of minimum levels of suspended sediment by varying the background sediment concentration constant SS b between 0 and 120 g m−3 at different values for orbital velocity (Figure 5B). Water Turbidity: . Turbidity of the water entering the bed may be
higher due to sediment resuspension in adjacent
barren areas. Water clarity towards the center will
increase as suspended particles settle due to re�duced hydrodynamics		If sediment concentrations are low, an established eelgrass bed tolerates high orbital velocities. The critical orbital velocity for vegetation decreases as sediment concentrations increase. If background levels of suspended sediment increase above 108 g m−3, seagrass cannot reduce light availability enough for a sustainable population.micro-tidal system (amplitude 1.3–2.5 m) sheltered by barrier islands and characterized by shallow intertidal and subtidal mudflats and deeper tidal channelsPubMed
42
Restoration #40Defining the Zostera marina (Eelgrass) Niche from Long-Term Success of Restored and Naturally Colonized Meadows: Implications for Seagrass RestorationVirginia Coastal BaysyTrophic Level Stabilization + Abundance of Invasive / Undesirable Speciesfetch constrains the eelgrass realized niche at natural recruitment sites relative to the species’ fundamental nichy% SurvivalEelgrass survived in 284 of the 490 restoration plots (Fig. 1). We observed successful eelgrass recruitment at 58 of the 173 systematically arrayed natural recruitment sites. Eelgrass survived in 284 of the 490 restoration plots (Fig. 1). We observed successful eelgrass recruitment at 58 of the 173 systematically arrayed natural recruitment sites.

rapid spread of eelgrass in areas distant from the seeded plots
ySediment Accretion + Water TurbidityOur study suggests that the Wadden Sea eelgrass beds could not recover due to threshold behavior, caused by positive feedback mechanisms in the system. In the absence of eelgrass, current and wave velocities were no longer reduced and suspended sediment concentrations and related turbidity levels became too high to sustain eelgrass growth.Long-term data at this site indicate that the rate of sediment accretion in meadows 10 years after restoration was about 6.0 mm year−1, similar to the rate of relative sea-level riseZ. marinaPubMed
43
Restoration #41Quantifying the Effects of Green Crab Damage to Eelgrass TransplantsyAbundance of Invasive / Undesirable SpeciesThese results have important implications for sea�grass restoration efforts. The significant influence of bi�ological organisms on transplants has only recently been acknowledged and has yet to be fully incorpo�rated into the site selection process.our mesocosm experiments showed that as much as 39% of transplanted shoots were lost within one week when exposed to crab densities of 4.0 crabs/m2. The results of our mesocosm experiments show that
green crabs can significantly decrease eelgrass trans�plant survival by directly damaging eelgrass shoots,
and they highlight the detrimental impact that biologi�cal organisms can have on attempts to restore eelgrass
beds.		y% Survival + Canopy Distance The research grew out of a successful 2.52 ha eelgrass transplant project in the Great Bay Estuary of New Hampshire.. Also, this high rate of loss would potentially reduce
the chance for a root-rhizome system to develop, if the
39% loss rate were compoundeed over the few weeks it
takes for transplants to become established.		nZ. Marina
44
Restoration # ____
45
Restoration # ____
46
Restoration # ____
47
Restoration # ____
48
Restoration # ____
49
Restoration # ____
50
Restoration # ____
51
Restoration # ____
52
Restoration # ____
53
Restoration # ____
54
Restoration # ____
55
Restoration # ____
56
Restoration # ____
57
Restoration # ____
58
Restoration # ____
59
Restoration # ____
60
Restoration # ____
61
Restoration # ____
62
Restoration # ____
63
Restoration # ____
64
Restoration # ____
65
Restoration # ____
66
Restoration # ____
67
Restoration # ____
68
Restoration # ____
69
Restoration # ____
70
Restoration # ____
71
Restoration # ____
72
Restoration # ____
73
Restoration # ____
74
Restoration # ____
75
Restoration # ____
76
Restoration # ____
77
Restoration # ____
78
Restoration # ____
79
Restoration # ____
80
Restoration # ____
81
Restoration # ____
82
Restoration # ____
83
Restoration # ____
84
Restoration # ____
85
Restoration # ____
86
Restoration # ____
87
Restoration # ____
88
Restoration # ____
89
Restoration # ____
90
Restoration # ____
91
Restoration # ____
92
Restoration # ____
93
Restoration # ____
94
Restoration # ____
95
Restoration # ____
96
Restoration # ____
97
Restoration # ____
98
Restoration # ____
99
Restoration # ____
100
Restoration # ____