Implications of a Hierarchical Relationship Among Channel Form, Instream Habitat, and Stream Communities for Restoration of Channelized Streams

Abstract

Hierarchy theory provides a conceptual framework for understanding the influence of differently scaled processes on the structure of stream communities. Channel form, instream habitat, and stream communities appear to be hierarchically related, but the strength of the relationships among all components of this hypothesized hierarchy have not been examined. We sampled channel form, instream habitat, fishes, and macroinvertebrates in a channelized stream in Mississippi and Alabama to examine the hypothesis that a hierarchical relationship exists among channel form, instream habitat, and stream communities. Instream habitat, fishes, and macroinvertebrates were sampled in May, July, and September 2000. Measurements of channel form were obtained in July 2000. Mantel tests, multiple regressions, and correlation analyses were used to assess strength of the relationships among channel form, instream habitat, and stream communities. Positive correlations were observed between channel form and instream habitat, and correlations observed between these factors were the greatest observed in our study. Overall, fish and macroinvertebrate communities exhibited stronger relationships with instream habitat than with channel form. Species richness, evenness, and abundance tended to exhibit greater correlations with instream habitat, while species composition had greater correlations with channel form. We concluded that channel form, instream habitat, and stream communities were hierarchically related.

Hydromorphological conditions, potential fish habitats and the fish community in a mountain river subjected to variable human impacts, the Czarny Dunajec, Polish Carpathians

“…The observed relations between the abundance and species richness of fish in the Czarny Dunajec and physical characteristics of the channel probably reflect genuine links between channel morphology, habitat conditions and riverine communities (Lamouroux et al, 2002;Smiley and Dibble, 2005;Dauwalter et al, 2008). This study documented the dependence of the number of fish species and specimens on the variability in water depth (and also in grain size of bed material in the case of fish abundance), while their dependence on an aggregated width of lowflow channels was not confirmed.…”

Linking fish trait responses to in‐stream habitat in reconstructed valley‐plugged stream reaches of the Coastal Plain, U.S.A.

“…Predictable, hierarchical relationships exist between reach‐scale geometry and in‐stream habitat features (e.g. substrate, woody debris) and these features can have direct effects on fish assemblage composition in Coastal Plain streams (Smiley & Dibble ; Alford ). We therefore hypothesize that while stream restoration in West Tennessee has met the goal of remediating valley‐plug effects, the design used during reconstruction process has (to date) not influenced habitat conditions and ecological processes such that restored reaches reflect “best attainable ecological condition.” Additionally, visual inspection of the temporal variation in fish trait structure within reaches suggest that restored reach fish assemblages are perhaps becoming more dissimilar from reference reaches over time.…”

“…Beyond specific hydrological problems, stream channelization also alters processes integral to the development of biotic organization. Accordingly, stream biological diversity can be predicted from variations in habitat conditions (Gorman & Karr 1978;Smiley & Dibble 2005;Walrath et al 2016), whereby species that structure biotic assemblages are adapted to a spatial hierarchy of habitat development processes (Southwood 1988;Townsend & Hildrew 1994;Poff 1997;Allan 2004;Hoeinghaus et al 2006;Lake et al 2007;Pease et al 2012). With regard to warmwater stream fish assemblages, watershed-scale factors such as climate and topography tend to define taxonomic variation yet reach-scale factors such as in-stream mesohabitat availability, water quality, and substrate composition tend to influence trait responses (Hoeinghaus et al 2006).…”

Effects of Student-Induced Trampling on Aquatic Macroinvertebrates in Agricultural Headwater Streams

“…Differences in NMS site scores among days and riffle types were then quantified with linear mixed effect model analyses. This two-step analytical approach is an indirect gradient analysis where ordination is conducted only with community data and the relationships of taxa composition with habitat variables or different habitat categories are then determined with additional statistical tests [40][41][42]. Additionally, we calculated three hydrologic variables (mean wetted width, mean water depth, mean water velocity) from each riffle on each sampling day.…”