Ecological Consequences of River Channel Management

Friberg, Nikolai

doi:10.1002/9781444307672.ch4

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is also the case of the Shannon-Wiener Index, which additionally seems to respond to water quality. This confirms that there are particular effects of the environmental variables on specific facets of diversity (Friberg, 2010;Li et al, 2019), provides complementary information about various ecological processes (e.g., Corbelli et al, 2015;Heino and Tolonen, 2017) and highlights the appropriateness of particular indices for measuring different aspects of river flow regime regulation.…”

Section: J O U R N a L P R E -P R O O Fsupporting

confidence: 63%

Multi-biologic group analysis for an ecosystem response to longitudinal river regulation gradients

Rivaes

Feio

Almeida

et al. 2021

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: J O U R N a L P R E -P R O O Fsupporting

confidence: 63%

Multi-biologic group analysis for an ecosystem response to longitudinal river regulation gradients

Rivaes

Feio

Almeida

et al. 2021

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The term ‘hydromorphology’ introduced by the WFD signifies how important physical features are considered in determining the ecological status of running waters, and is defined as the hydrological and geomorphological conditions of rivers and streams. Degradation and loss of physical complexity in lotic ecosystems have been massive in most parts of the world through, for instance, channelization, dredging, wood removal, and so on . In addition, siltation with fine sediments is a major problem in many streams, especially in agricultural catchments .…”

Section: Pressures On Lotic Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts and indicators of change in lotic ecosystems

Friberg

2014

WIREs Water

Self Cite

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fresh waters have seen the largest decline in biodiversity of any ecosystem, with lotic ecosystems particularly impacted by human activities. The main drivers of environmental change relate primarily to agriculture, urbanization, and industrial production that have resulted in severe habitat degradation in streams and rivers worldwide. The increasing impact of climate change and invasive species has put further pressure on these systems. For more than a century, status of rivers and streams has been assessed using biological indicators and represents a prime example of applying ecological knowledge to address societal issues. Today, legislative regulations and water management rely primarily on measurements of ecological status through the assessment of biotic communities. There has been a continuous development of these biological indicators but primarily based on fundamental approaches that date back to the original assessment systems. The indicators used today ignore large parts of what is occurring in the ecosystem and cannot, in most cases, diagnose the cause of degradation with a reasonable precision. There is clearly a need to improve existing assessment systems through new and innovative approaches that, as an example, include ecosystem processes and can be linked more closely to the services that lotic ecosystems provide. This article critically reviews the use of biological indicators in the context of inherent properties of lotic ecosystems and types of degradation, and suggests how assessment could be refined through applying a number of additional approaches to those already used.The development of the RIVPACS methodology over the past 30 years has been an important step forward in the way we consider assessment of streams and rivers. The approach is not stressor-specific but uses niche theory from general ecology to predict species assemblage composition. 93 During the past Volume

show abstract

“…More robust studies are needed (Clews and Ormerod, 2010), as exemplified by the studies of Bishop et al (2005), showing significant P load reduction due to BMPs; Benstead et al (2007), showing stream recovery from nutrient addition experiments; and Ormerod and Durance (2009), showing stream recovery from acidification. New studies should not only incorporate an understanding of the biophysical processes but also take on the challenge to integrate the social, ethical, and economic dimensions of environmental management (Lankester et al, 2009; Spash et al, 2009; Friberg, 2010b; Palmer et al, 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Tarland Catchment Initiative and Its Effect on Stream Water Quality and Macroinvertebrate Indices

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Th e Tarland Catchment Initiative is a partnership venture between researchers, land managers, regulators, and the local community. Its aims are to improve water quality, promote biodiversity, and increase awareness of catchment management. In this study, the eff ects of buff er strip installations and remediation of a large septic tank effl uent were appraised by water physicochemistry (suspended solids, NO 3 , NH 4 , soluble reactive P) and stream macroinvertebrate indices used by the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency. It was done during before and after interventions over an 8-yr period using a paired catchment approach. Because macroinvertebrate indices were previously shown to respond negatively to suspended solid concentrations in the study area, the installation of buff er strips along the headwaters was expected to improve macroinvertebrate scores. Although water quality (soluble reactive P, NH 4 ) improved downstream of the septic tank effl uent after remediation, there was no detectable change in macroinvertebrate scores. Buff er strip installations in the headwaters had no measurable eff ects (beyond possible weak trends) on water quality or macroinvertebrate scores. Either the buff er strips have so far been ineff ective or ineff ectiveness of assessment methods and sampling frequency and time lags in recovery prevent us detecting reliable eff ects. To explain and appreciate these constraints on measuring stream recovery, continuous capacity building with land managers and other stakeholders is essential; otherwise, the feasibility of undertaking suffi cient management interventions is likely to be compromised and projects deemed unsuccessful.

show abstract

Ecological Consequences of River Channel Management

Cited by 4 publications

References 31 publications

Multi-biologic group analysis for an ecosystem response to longitudinal river regulation gradients

Multi-biologic group analysis for an ecosystem response to longitudinal river regulation gradients

Impacts and indicators of change in lotic ecosystems

The Tarland Catchment Initiative and Its Effect on Stream Water Quality and Macroinvertebrate Indices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About