In this overview (introductory article to a special issue including 14 papers), we consider all main types of natural and artificial inland freshwater habitas (fwh). For each type, we identify the main biodiversity patterns and ecological features, human impacts on the system and environmental issues, and discuss ways to use this information to improve stewardship. Examples of selected key biodiversity/ecological features (habitat type): narrow endemics, sensitive (groundwater and GDEs); crenobionts, LIHRes (springs); unidirectional flow, nutrient spiraling (streams); naturally turbid, floodplains, large-bodied species (large rivers); depth-variation in benthic communities (lakes); endemism and diversity (ancient lakes); threatened, sensitive species (oxbow lakes, SWE); diverse, reduced littoral (reservoirs); cold-adapted species (Boreal and Arctic fwh); endemism, depauperate (Antarctic fwh); flood pulse, intermittent wetlands, biggest river basins (tropical fwh); variable hydrologic regime—periods of drying, flash floods (arid-climate fwh). Selected impacts: eutrophication and other pollution, hydrologic modifications, overexploitation, habitat destruction, invasive species, salinization. Climate change is a threat multiplier, and it is important to quantify resistance, resilience, and recovery to assess the strategic role of the different types of freshwater ecosystems and their value for biodiversity conservation. Effective conservation solutions are dependent on an understanding of connectivity between different freshwater ecosystems (including related terrestrial, coastal and marine systems).

Springs are biodiversity hotspots and unique habitats that are threatened, especially by water overdraft. Here we review knowledge on ambient-temperature (non-geothermal) freshwater springs that achieve sufficient oversaturation for CaCO3 -by physical CO2 degassing and activity of photoautotrophs- to deposit limestone, locally resulting in scenic carbonate structures: Limestone-Precipitating Springs (LPS). The most characteristic organisms in these springs are those that contribute to carbonate precipitation, e.g.: the mosses Palustriella and Eucladium, the crenophilous desmid Oocardium stratum, and cyanobacteria (e.g., Rivularia). These organisms appear to be sensitive to phosphorus pollution. Invertebrate diversity is modest, and highest in pools with an aquatic-terrestrial interface. Internationally, comprehensive legislation for spring protection is still relatively scarce. Where available, it covers all spring types. The situation in Europe is peculiar: the only widespread spring type included in the EU Habitat Directive is LPS, mainly because of landscape aesthetics. To support LPS inventorying and management to meet conservation-legislation requirements we developed a general conceptual model to predict where LPS are more likely to occur. The model is based on the pre-requisites for LPS: an aquifer lithology that enables build-up of high bicarbonate and Ca(2+) to sustain CaCO3 oversaturation after spring emergence, combined with intense groundwater percolation especially along structural discontinuities (e.g., fault zones, joints, schistosity), and a proper hydrogeological structure of the discharging area. We validated this model by means of the LPS information system for the Emilia-Romagna Region (northern Italy). The main threats to LPS are water diversion, nutrient enrichment, and lack of awareness by non-specialized persons and administrators. We discuss an emblematic case study to provide management suggestions. The present review is devoted to LPS but the output of intense ecological research in Central Europe during the past decades has clearly shown that effective conservation legislation should be urgently extended to comprise all types of spring habitats.

No abstract

The main aim of this study is the experimental analysis of the hydrogeological behaviour of the Mt. Prinzera ultramafic massif in the northern Apennines, Italy. The analysed multidisciplinary database has been acquired through (a) geologic and structural survey; (b) geomorphologic survey; (c) hydrogeological monitoring; (d) physico‐chemical analyses; and (e) isotopic analyses. The ultramafic medium is made of several lithological units, tectonically overlapped. Between them, a low‐permeability, discontinuous unit has been identified. This unit behaves as an aquitard and causes a perched groundwater to temporary flow within the upper medium, close to the surface. This perched groundwater flows out along several structurally controlled depressions, and then several high‐altitude temporary springs can be observed during recharge, together with several perennial basal (i.e., low altitude) springs, caused by the compartmentalisation of the system because of high‐angle tectonic discontinuities.