What Came First, Mud or Biostabilizers? Elucidating Interacting Effects in a Coupled Model of Mud, Saltmarsh, Microphytobenthos, and Estuarine Morphology

Abstract

Abstract Mud accretion and establishment of biostabilizers, such as microphytobenthos and saltmarsh vegetation, govern the development of estuarine morphology. Mud facilitates saltmarsh survival and microphytobenthos growth, which in turn promotes sedimentation and reduces mud erosion. Consequently, an increasing extent and thickness of mud cover might lead to a stabilization of large‐scale estuarine morphology. To disentangle the interactions between saltmarsh establishment, microphytobenthos colonization, and mud layer formation, we use our novel eco‐morphodynamic model applied to the Western Scheldt estuary. Our model shows that presence of dynamic saltmarsh vegetation and microphytobenthos enhances predictions of mud location in the computations compared to field data. Saltmarsh establishment is partly determined by the antecedent mud content in the bed, resulting in varying emerging vegetation coverage between model experiments of a generic saltmarsh and a saltmarsh species that requires prior mud for establishment. In contrast to microphytobenthos enhancing seasonal mud accretion during their growth period, saltmarshes promote largest accretion when lower biomass and high water levels are present. Interestingly, thick long‐term mud is enhanced despite the biostabilizers seasonal growth. The combination of saltmarsh and microphytobenthos leads to expanding saltmarsh cover and mud area. Generally, mud layer thickness is governed by the ratio of hydroperiod and maximum flow velocity that is mediated by the biostabilizers. On estuary scale, the presence of intertidal vegetation leads to increased mud volumes in the intertidal. Mud layers are enhanced in extent by a mud‐dependent species and in thickness by a generic species. Thus, local biostabilization alters large‐scale morphology controlling long‐term estuarine development.