1. Macrophyte performance as a function of platform elevation in micro- and macrotidal salt marshes Diana Rodriguez Department of Biological Sciences University of South Carolina Columbia, SC 29208

2. Experimental Design Six treatments and six replicates within treatments MP Replicated at three sites with varying tidal ranges: Cocodrie, La -- 30-40 cm North Inlet, SC -- 1.5 m PIE, MA -- 3-4 m Growth response of S. alterniflora will likely be affected by varying the marsh platform (MP) relative to local mean tidal range.

3. Nov. harvest & May planting Platform varies from 0.5 m – 1.33 m MHTMHT

4. Average Stem Height – Cocodrie, LA } } Low marsh morphology High marsh morphology

5. Average Stem Height – PIE, LTER, MA } Low marsh } High marsh

6. Average Stem Density – Cocodrie, LA } Further from MHT & MLT } Within MHT & MLT

7. Average Stem Density – PIE, LTER, MA

8. NAPP – Cocodrie, LA (microtidal site) MHT MLT

9. NAPP – PIE LTER, MA (macrotidal site) MHT MLT

10. Aboveground:Belowground Ratio – PIE LTER, MA Increase in aboveground biomass as you decrease height of platform below MHT

11. Belowground Biomass – PIE, LTER, MA n=3

12. Summary Lower stem densities below MHT –Morphologically similar to low marsh –% belowground biomass of first 10 cm appears to increase below MHT Higher stem densities above MHT –Morphologically similar to high marsh NAPP appears to increase (in microtidal site) with increasing inundation