In the Clay Belt the HMWT + C[H.sub.4] flux and conductivity gradients are virtually independent, with the former dominant and accounting for 12.7% of the species variance.
In the Clay Belt [ILLUSTRATION FOR FIGURE 4 OMITTED], the HMWT and C[H.sub.4] flux optima and tolerances for individual species show a distinct trend along the moisture gradient from the top hummock species to the wettest carpet or pool species.
The plots of individual species distributions for selected species in relation to HMWT and log C[H.sub.4] flux [ILLUSTRATION FOR FIGURE 5 OMITTED] are shown with Gaussian curves fitted to the data.
The optima and tolerances for Labrador Trough bryophytes (Table 2, [ILLUSTRATION FOR FIGURE 6 OMITTED]) show a similar inverse relationship between HMWT and log C[H.sub.4] flux for each of the species, but the ordering of species is not as closely tied to the moisture gradient as in the Clay Belt.
Results of the WA calibration models for C[H.sub.4] flux and HMWT are listed in Table 3.
observed HMWT and log C[H.sub.4] flux with WA-TOL were 0.75 and 0.70, respectively (Table 3; [ILLUSTRATION FOR FIGURES 8A, B OMITTED]); the RMSE for each of these analyses was 83.3 and 0.44, respectively.
predicted values of bryophytes, height above mean water table (HMWT), and log C[H.sub.4] flux (n = 98 samples).