Comparing biotic drivers of litter breakdown across stream compartments

Peralta‐Maraver, Ignacio; Perkins, Daniel M.; Thompson, Murray S. A.; Fussmann, Katarina E.; Reiss, Joshua D.; Robertson, Anne L.

doi:10.1111/1365-2656.13000

Cited by 17 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Streams varied from small upland, acidic headwaters to large lowland, base-rich chalk streams, covering a large productivity and pollution gradient. Original datasets included information on a large set of environmental variables by study site: canopy cover, sediment morphology (cobbles, gravel, sand, and silt), leaf litter, depth and width of channel, submerged plants and submerged wood, temperature, pH, altitude, latitude, longitude, dissolved organic carbon, ammonium, nitrate, and phosphate [21]. Streambed communities were originally sampled using colonization traps (mesh = 0.5 cm, volume = 38-45 mL) containing three different organic substrates [21].…”

Section: Data Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Original datasets included information on a large set of environmental variables by study site: canopy cover, sediment morphology (cobbles, gravel, sand, and silt), leaf litter, depth and width of channel, submerged plants and submerged wood, temperature, pH, altitude, latitude, longitude, dissolved organic carbon, ammonium, nitrate, and phosphate [21]. Streambed communities were originally sampled using colonization traps (mesh = 0.5 cm, volume = 38-45 mL) containing three different organic substrates [21]. At each study site, six colonization traps were installed in pairs in the streambed at 0-2 and 15 cm depth for between 29-61 days.…”

Section: Data Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Then, body dimensions (length and width in µ m) of all collected individuals were converted into dry carbon content (M) using allometric relationships (further details on sampling design and sample processing are available in Peralta-Maraver et al [21]). Streambed communities were originally sampled using colonization traps (mesh = 0.5 cm, volume = 38-45 mL) containing three different organic substrates [21]. At each study site, six colonization traps were installed in pairs in the streambed at 0-2 and 15 cm depth for between 29-61 days.…”

Section: Data Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies have focused on reach or local scales with low replication power. However, the functions and services provided by the streambed are mediated by all the different groups of organisms and the complex interactions between them and the environment [21]. Thus, a more integrative analysis ensuring the representation of the whole streambed assemblage, as well as large-scale approaches, must be undertaken to fully understand how riverine ecosystems will respond to the input of EOCs.Body size scaling represents a synthetic analytical framework [22] which can be used to integrate the whole streambed assemblage.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To date, we do not know how EOCs affect the N-M relationship despite the insights that this approach could afford with regard to understanding how EOCs compromise the natural functioning of riverine systems.Here, we report for the first time the effect of EOC pollution on community composition and N-M relationship coefficients in streambed communities following a regional scale approach. For this purpose, we make use of a large dataset from an existing survey study characterizing streambed communities and environmental features across 30 UK streams [21]. We complement that dataset with unpublished concentrations of 24 model EOCs measured in the pore-space of the streambeds collected at the same temporal and spatial resolution as the community samples.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Mapping Micro-Pollutants and Their Impacts on the Size Structure of Streambed Communities

Peralta‐Maraver

Posselt

Perkins

et al. 2019

Water

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently there has been increasing concern over the vast array of emerging organic contaminants (EOCs) detected in streams and rivers worldwide. Understanding of the ecological implications of these compounds is limited to local scale case studies, partly as a result of technical limitations and a lack of integrative analyses. Here, we apply state-of-the-art instrumentation to analyze a complex suite of EOCs in the streambed of 30 UK streams and their effect on streambed communities. We apply the abundance-body mass (N-M) relationship approach as an integrative metric of the deviation of natural communities from reference status as a result of EOC pollution. Our analysis includes information regarding the N and M for individual prokaryotes, unicellular flagellates and ciliates, meiofauna, and macroinvertebrates. We detect a strong significant dependence of the N-M relationship coefficients with the presence of EOCs in the system, to the point of shielding the effect of other important environmental factors such as temperature, pH, and productivity. However, contrary to other stressors, EOC pollution showed a positive effect on the N-M coefficient in our work. This phenomenon can be largely explained by the increase in large-size tolerant taxa under polluted conditions. We discuss the potential implications of these results in relation to bioaccumulation and biomagnification processes. Our findings shed light on the impact of EOCs on the organization and ecology of the whole streambed community for the first time.2 of 12 affect all levels of biological organization [9]. However, characterization and quantification of EOCs in riverine systems is still limited, as is our understanding of their relationship with environmental gradients, especially at large spatial scales [4]. This is largely because determining low concentrations of these substances can be a challenge using existing analytical methodologies [12]. Consequently, most EOCs have been determined to be low risk due to low environmental concentrations [13], and their effect on natural systems is largely unknown.Most anthropogenic effluents are discharged to surface streams and rivers where water is exchanged between the open channel and the saturated permeable streambed sediments [14]. Consequently, dissolved EOCs penetrate the sediments, and organisms located here may be exposed to the effects of EOCs for longer periods of time because of the extended residence times of water in the pore-spaces [15,16]. Streambed sediments harbor diverse and productive biological consortia, whose components range from prokaryotes and microscopic single cell eukaryotes (e.g., flagellates and ciliates) through to meio-and macrofauna (rotifers, copepods, and insect larvae). This translates into a great diversity of life strategies and adaptation capabilities, and, consequently, understanding the effect of EOCs on the whole streambed assemblage is challenging. For example, it might be expected that the rapid population growth and adaptation capacity of prokaryotes might result...

show abstract

Section: Data Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Data Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%