Adamus PR, Clairain EJ Jr, Smith RD, Young RE (1987) Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET); Volume II: Methodology. Operational Draft Technical Report Y-87-___. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, USA
Bendor T. (2009) A dynamic analysis of the wetland mitigation process and its effects on no net loss policy. Landscape and Urban Planning, 89:17-27
Brooks RP (ed.) (2004) Monitoring and Assessing Pennsylvania Wetlands. Final Report for Cooperative Agreement No. X-827157-01, between Penn State Cooperative Wetlands Center, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC, USA
Brooks RP, Wardrop DH, Cole CA (2006) Inventorying and monitoring wetland condition and restoration potential on a watershed basis with examples from Spring Creek Watershed, Pennsylvania, USA. Environmental Management, 38:673-687
Brooks, RP, Wardrop DH, editors (2013) Mid-Atlantic Freshwater Wetlands: Advances in science, management, policy, and practice. Springer, New York
Brown PH, Lant CL (1999) The effect of wetland mitigation banking on the achievement of no-net-loss. Environmental management, 23:333-345
Campbell DA, Cole CA, Brooks RP (2002) A comparison of created and natural wetlands in Pennsylvania, USA. Wetlands Ecology and Management, 10:41-49
Cole CA, Shafer D (2002) Section 404 wetland mitigation and permit success criteria in Pennsylvania, USA, 1986–1999. Environmental Management, 30:508-515
Cote D, Kehler DG, Bourne C, Wiersma YF (2009) A new measure of longitudinal connectivity for stream networks. Landscape Ecology, 24:101-113
Dahl TE, Allord GJ (1996) History of wetlands in the conterminous United States, National Water Summary on Wetland Resources, U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper, Washington, DC, USA
Dahl TE (2006) Status and trends of wetlands in the conterminous United States 1998 to 2004. U.S. Department of the Interior; Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, USA
Dahl TE (2011) Status and trends of wetlands in the conterminous United States 2004 to 2009. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, USA
Erős T, Schmera D, Schick RS (2011) Network thinking in riverscape conservation–a graph-based approach. Biological Conservation, 144:184-192
Erős T, Olden JD, Schick RS, Schmera D, Fortin MJ (2012) Characterizing connectivity relationships in freshwaters using patch-based graphs. Landscape ecology, 27:303-317
ESRI (2009) ArcGIS Desktop: Release 9.3. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, CA
Federal Register (2008) Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources, Final Rule. 73:19594-19705
García-Feced C, Saura S, Elena-Rosselló R (2011) Improving landscape connectivity in forest districts: A two-stage process for prioritizing agricultural patches for reforestation. Forest ecology and management, 261:154-161
Gebo NA, Brooks RP (2012) Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) assessments of mitigation sites compared to natural reference wetlands in Pennsylvania. Wetlands, 32:321-331
Galpern P, Manseau M, Fall A (2011) Patch-based graphs of landscape connectivity: a guide to construction, analysis and application for conservation. Biological Conservation, 144:44-55
Gilliam JW (1994) Riparian Wetlands and Water Quality. Journal of Environmental Quality, 23:886-900
Gwin SE, Kentula ME, Shaffer PW (1999) Evaluating the effects of wetland regulation through hydrogeomorphic classification and landscape profiles. Wetlands, 19:477-489
Hoeltje SM, Cole CA (2007) Losing function through wetland mitigation in central Pennsylvania, USA. Environmental Management, 39:385-402
Hychka KC (2010) Characterizing Hydrologic Settings and Hydrologic Regimes of Headwater Riparian Wetlands in the Ridge and Valley of Pennsylvania. Dissertation, Pennsylvania State University
Johnston CA, Detenbeck NE, Niemi GJ (1990) The cumulative effect of wetlands on stream water quality and quantity. A landscape approach. Biogeochemistry, 10:105-141
Kihslinger RL (2008) Success of wetland mitigation projects. National Wetlands Newsletter, 30:14-16
King DM (1997) Valuing Wetlands for Watershed Planning. National Wetland Newsletter, 19:5-10
Mack JJ, Micacchion M (2006) An Ecological Assessment of Ohio Mitigation Banks: Vegetation, Amphibians, Hydrology, and Soils. Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Surface Water, Wetland Ecology Group, Columbus, OH, USA
Malvadkar U, Scatena F, Leon M (2014) A Comparison of Connectivity Metrics on Watersheds and Implications for Water Management. River Research and Applications, 1535-1467
McClain ME, Boyer EW, Dent CL, Gergel SE, Grimm NB, Groffman PM, Hart SC, Harvey JW, Johnston CA, Mayorga E, McDowell WH, Pinay G (2003). Biogeochemical hot spots and hot moments at the interface of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Ecosystems, 6:301-312
Minor ES, Urban DL (2007) Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. Ecological Applications, 17:1771-1782
Minor ES, Urban DL (2008) A graph‐theory framework for evaluating landscape connectivity and conservation planning. Conservation biology, 22:297-307
Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JG (2000) Wetlands, 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York
Moon JB (2012) Edaphic Properties, Their Heterogeneity, and Associated Microbial Communities in Headwater Wetland Complexes of the Ridge and Valley Region, Pennsylvania. Dissertation, Pennsylvania State University
Moon JB, Wardrop DH (2013) Linking Landscape to Wetland Condition: Case Study of Eight Headwaters. In: Brooks RP, Wardrop DH (ed) Mid-Atlantic Freshwater Wetlands: Advances in science, management, policy, and practice. Springer, pp 61-108
Morgan KL, Roberts TH (2003) Characterization of wetland mitigation projects in Tennessee, USA. Wetlands, 23:65-69
Naiman RJ, Decamps H, McClain ME (2005) Riparia: ecology, conservation, and management of streamside communities. Elsevier Academic Press, Amsterdam
NRC (2001) Compensating for Wetland Losses Under the Clean Water Act. National Academy Press, Washington, DC
Osborne LL, Kovacic DA (1993) Riparian vegetated buffer strips in water‐quality restoration and stream management. Freshwater biology, 29:243-258
Opsahl T, Agneessens F, Skvoretz J (2010) Node centrality in weighted networks: Generalizing degree and shortest paths. Social Networks, 32:245-251
Pascual-Hortal L, Saura S (2006) Comparison and development of new graph-based landscape connectivity indices: towards the priorization of habitat patches and corridors for conservation. Landscape Ecology, 21:959-967
PMAP (2014) Program Land Cover for Pennsylvania 2005. http://www.pasda.psu.edu/uci/MetadataDisplay.aspx?entry=PASDA&file=palanduse05utm18nad83.xml&dataset=1100. Accessed 21 September 2014
Robb JT (2002) Assessing wetland compensatory mitigation sites to aid in establishing mitigation ratios. Wetlands, 22:435-440
Saura S, Pascual-Hortal L (2007) Conefor Sensinode 2.2 User’s Manual: Software for quantifying the importance of habitat patches for maintaining landscape connectivity through graphs and habitat availability indices. University of Lleida, Spain. www.conefor.org. Accessed 24 January 2015
Saura S, Torné J (2009) Conefor Sensinode 2.2: a software package for quantifying the importance of habitat patches for landscape connectivity. Environmental Modeling & Software 24: 135-139
Saura S, Pascual-Hortal L (2007) A new habitat availability index to integrate connectivity in landscape conservation planning: comparison with existing indices and application to a case study. Landscape and Urban Planning, 83:91-103
Sifneos JC, Cake EW, Kentula ME (1992) Effects of Section 404 permitting on freshwater wetlands in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi. Wetlands, 12:28-36
Tyrna A (2015) Characterizing the Network Structure of Headwater Riparian Wetlands in the Ridge and Valley Region, Pennsylvania. Dissertation, Pennsylvania State University
Urban D, Keitt T (2001) Landscape connectivity: a graph-theoretic perspective. Ecology, 82:1205-1218
Urban DL, Minor ES, Treml EA, Schick RS (2009) Graph models of habitat mosaics. Ecology letters, 12:260-273
USEPA (2015) Connectivity of streams and wetlands to downstream waters: a review & synthesis of the Science. EPA/600/R-14/475F, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DC, USA
Van Looy K, Cavillon C, Tormos T, Piffady J, Landry P, Souchon Y (2013) A scale-sensitive connectivity analysis to identify ecological networks and conservation value in river networks. Landscape ecology, 28:1239-1249
Wainger LA, King D, Salzman J, Boyd J (2001) Wetland value indicators for scoring mitigation trades. Stan. Envtl. LJ, 20:413
Wardrop DH, Kentula ME, Stevens DL Jr, Rubbo JM, Hychka K, Brooks RP (2007) Assessment of wetlands in the Upper Juniata watershed in Pennsylvania, U.S.A using the hydrogeomorphic approach. Wetlands. 27:432-445
Woltemade CJ (2000) Ability of restored wetlands to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations in agricultural drainage water. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 55:303-309
yWorks GmbH, the diagramming company (2004-2014). Tubingen, Germany. docs.yworks.com/yfiles/doc/developers-guide/. Accessed 2 December 2014
Zedler JB (2003) Wetlands at your service: reducing impacts of agriculture at the watershed scale. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 1:65-72
Zetterberg A, Mörtberg UM, Balfors B (2010) Making graph theory operational for landscape ecological assessments, planning, and design. Landscape and Urban Planning, 95:181-191