Hi Jonathan,
For our study in south-east QLD, Australia, we have access to field data for both accretion rates and for surface elevation changes (i.e. accretion minus subsidence caused by e.g. soil compaction). The two values differ a lot, especially for saltmarsh which has an accretion rate of ca 2 mm/year but a negative surface elevation change (relative to a fixed subsurface benchmark).
Do you think it would be better to use the values for surface elevation change than the pure accretion values when running SLAMM?
Thanks,
Karin
For our study in south-east QLD, Australia, we have access to field data for both accretion rates and for surface elevation changes (i.e. accretion minus subsidence caused by e.g. soil compaction). The two values differ a lot, especially for saltmarsh which has an accretion rate of ca 2 mm/year but a negative surface elevation change (relative to a fixed subsurface benchmark).
Do you think it would be better to use the values for surface elevation change than the pure accretion values when running SLAMM?
Thanks,
Karin