Change does not happen overnight: a case study on stream macroinvertebrates

Guareschi, Simone; Laini, Alex; Fenoglio, Stefano; Paveto, M.; Bo, Tiziano

doi:10.1051/kmae/2016008

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 62 publications

(58 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Often, dominant drivers also depend on the focus of the study (e.g., diversity, community composition and biomass). For instance, flow velocity and water depth were found to be important local drivers of the composition of macroinvertebrate communities (Dolédec et al, 2007; Guareschi et al, 2016), whereas discharge and substrate (in terms of texture, composition and architecture, e.g., clast shapes and sizes) were important drivers of the local biomass of macroinvertebrates (Benson et al, 2013; Graça et al, 2004). The dominant drivers of macroinvertebrate community composition and biomass are also context‐dependant; that is, communities from different geographic areas might be structured by different drivers (Mathers et al, 2022; Tonkin et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Basin‐scale variables drive macroinvertebrate biomass in low‐order streams across different mountain ecoregions

Burgazzi,

Laini,

Viaroli

et al. 2023

Journal of Biogeography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimBiomass is an important descriptor of macroinvertebrate communities, providing insights into stream productivity and ecosystem functioning. Nevertheless, the drivers of biomass are still poorly assessed, especially in multiscale studies. Here, we aimed at filling this gap by assessing the relationship between environmental variables measured at patch, reach and basin scale and macroinvertebrate biomass, as well as the transferability of such relationships across different mountain regions.LocationMaritime‐Cottian Alps and the Tuscan‐Emilian Apennine (Northern Italy).TaxaFreshwater macroinvertebrates.MethodsPatch‐, reach‐ and basin‐scale variables, either measured in the field or computed with kriging techniques, were summarised with sparse principal component axes and later used in mixed modelling and variance partitioning to assess the relative effect of environmental variables on macroinvertebrate biomass. An independent model was run for each region, and results were compared to assess the transferability of drivers.ResultsBasin‐scale variables explained most of the biomass variability in both regions, supporting the transferability of results. More specifically, mean cumulated daily precipitation was the main driver of macroinvertebrate biomass. Patch‐ and reach‐scale variables also significantly affected macroinvertebrate biomass, but their relative role varied depending on the region considered, without any clear pattern.Main ConclusionsOverall, we highlighted a dominance of basin‐scale drivers—and specifically of the mean cumulated precipitation—and a consistency of results across different mountain regions. This implies that climatic variables regulate energy fluxes to higher trophic levels and subsidies to both downstream river sections and terrestrial ecosystems. These findings offer insights into ecosystem‐level vulnerability to climate change.

show abstract