Comparison of creek and bay influences on salt marsh sediment budget and deposition patterns

Abstract The resilience of salt marshes with low organic production depends on their effective capture and retention of mineral sediment from adjacent waters. Little prior work has directly compared mechanisms of sediment import from wave‐influenced marsh boundaries against those of tidal creeks. We used simultaneous deployment of net‐deposition tiles and oceanographic sensors to identify the timing and magnitude of sediment import/export to, and redistribution within, a marsh in south San Francisco Bay. As the marsh has both an eroding bay‐exposed scarp and a prominent tidal creek, we investigated the mechanisms and magnitudes of sediment import from the marsh‐bay versus the marsh‐creek interface. The strong daily sea breezes of the summer season produced most of the wave‐driven erosion of the marsh scarp and controlled suspended sediment concentrations; the winter season had weaker winds punctuated by a few storms. A large seasonal difference in suspended sediment concentrations influenced both flood and ebb sediment fluxes to the marsh and led to much higher rates of import in the summer. Both bay‐side and creek‐side processes were important to total marsh sediment budget. Bay‐side sediment contributions were more variable in time due to the bay‐influenced environment, and creek‐side contributions were overall larger, reflecting the large proportion of the marsh fed by creek water. Sediment was redistributed throughout the system, with erosion near the bay‐edge, accretion near the creek‐edge and slow import to the marsh interior. The marsh was net importing sediment in the summer and exporting in the winter from different rates of these processes; on an annual scale, the marsh was net importing despite rapid lateral marsh loss. These findings emphasize that a positive sediment budget does not imply a stable marsh and that both creek‐ and edge‐side dynamics are important for marsh sedimentation and geomorphic trajectories. Further, we expand understandings of non‐storm and seasonal controls on marsh sedimentation. Copyright © 2025 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Earth Surface Processes and Landforms
Published
2025-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.70137
Primary Topic
Coastal wetland ecosystem dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of creek and bay influences on salt marsh sediment budget and deposition patterns

Mark T. Stacey, Jessica R. Lacy, Lukas WinklerPrins, Karen M. Thorne et al.
Earth Surface Processes and Landforms
Coastal wetland ecosystem dynamics
article

Comparison of creek and bay influences on salt marsh sediment budget and deposition patterns

Mark T. Stacey, Jessica R. Lacy, Lukas WinklerPrins, Karen M. Thorne, Scott F. Jones, McKenna L. Bristow
article en

Abstract

Abstract The resilience of salt marshes with low organic production depends on their effective capture and retention of mineral sediment from adjacent waters. Little prior work has directly compared mechanisms of sediment import from wave‐influenced marsh boundaries against those of tidal creeks. We used simultaneous deployment of net‐deposition tiles and oceanographic sensors to identify the timing and magnitude of sediment import/export to, and redistribution within, a marsh in south San Francisco Bay. As the marsh has both an eroding bay‐exposed scarp and a prominent tidal creek, we investigated the mechanisms and magnitudes of sediment import from the marsh‐bay versus the marsh‐creek interface. The strong daily sea breezes of the summer season produced most of the wave‐driven erosion of the marsh scarp and controlled suspended sediment concentrations; the winter season had weaker winds punctuated by a few storms. A large seasonal difference in suspended sediment concentrations influenced both flood and ebb sediment fluxes to the marsh and led to much higher rates of import in the summer. Both bay‐side and creek‐side processes were important to total marsh sediment budget. Bay‐side sediment contributions were more variable in time due to the bay‐influenced environment, and creek‐side contributions were overall larger, reflecting the large proportion of the marsh fed by creek water. Sediment was redistributed throughout the system, with erosion near the bay‐edge, accretion near the creek‐edge and slow import to the marsh interior. The marsh was net importing sediment in the summer and exporting in the winter from different rates of these processes; on an annual scale, the marsh was net importing despite rapid lateral marsh loss. These findings emphasize that a positive sediment budget does not imply a stable marsh and that both creek‐ and edge‐side dynamics are important for marsh sedimentation and geomorphic trajectories. Further, we expand understandings of non‐storm and seasonal controls on marsh sedimentation. Copyright © 2025 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earth Surface Processes and LandformsVol. 50(11)
University of North Florida (US), United States Geological Survey (US), Pacific Science Center (US), University of California, Berkeley (US)
McGill University, U.S. Geological Survey
Openalex Percentile: Top 77%
Coastal wetland ecosystem dynamics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.