Integrating biological realism into habitat restoration and conservation strategies for small streams

Rabení, Charles F.; Sowa, Scott P.

doi:10.1139/96-259

Cited by 85 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a consequence of these results, retaining, enhancing, and restoring the diversity of the habitat (Simberloff, 1988;Freeman and Freeman, 1994;Rabeni and Sowa, 1996;Sutherland, 1998), with its mosaic of microhabitat patches (Cornell and Lawton, 1992;Robson and Chester, 1999), seem to be the only options available for conserving A. italicus and other indigenous species in stream communities (Douglas and Lake, 1994;Townsend and Hildrew, 1994).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conserving indigenous crayfish: stock assessment and habitat requirements in the threatened Austropotamobius italicus

Brusconi¹,

Bertocchi²,

Renai³

et al. 2008

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT1. As part of the Austropotamobius pallipes species complex, the crayfish Austropotamobius italicus is a species of community interest whose preservation requires the designation of Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) (Annex II, EU Habitats Directive). This study aimed at (1) assessing the conservation status of this threatened indigenous species by stock assessment in Central Italy and (2) identifying some aspects of its elective habitat.2. Surveys were conducted in nine streams harbouring A. italicus (streams WI) and in 10 streams where crayfish populations became extinct at least 5 years before the study (streams WO).3. The results confirmed that A. italicus is a K-selected species, with a relatively slow growth rate (males: 0.34; females: 0.37) and a long life expectancy (males: 8.2 years, females: 7.8 years). The extant populations are healthy, showing balanced sex-ratios and well structured age-class compositions. Mortality is mainly due to fishing, which is illegal in Tuscany.4. Principal Components Analyses showed that the streams WI and WO differ in the abundance of allochthonous plant detritus but not in the taxonomic composition of their macroinvertebrate communities. Age classes were found to be spatially segregated, juveniles mainly using cobbles as substrates and adults seemingly avoiding them.5. The loss of the pristine riverine landscape seems to have been responsible, together with illegal fishing, for the local extinction of the species. As a consequence, retaining, enhancing, and restoring the habitat and its complexity are required for the preservation of A. italicus.6. The designation of SACs might help in this endeavour if accompanied by programmes aimed at publicizing the need for conservation of this species. Unfortunately, crayfish-focused projects supported by LIFE in Italy since 1992 (4%) and the SACs involved (1.4%) have been relatively few, despite the poor conservation status of this species and its well recognized ecological role.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conserving indigenous crayfish: stock assessment and habitat requirements in the threatened Austropotamobius italicus

Brusconi¹,

Bertocchi²,

Renai³

et al. 2008

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This decision was based on the recognition that biodiversity conservation requires an ecosystem approach (Franklin 1993, Grumbine 1994, Leslie et al 1996, De Leo and Levin 1997 and that biodiversity can be described and should be conserved at multiple levels of organization (Whittaker 1962, 1972, Noss 1990, Jennings 1996, Rabeni and Sowa 1996, Grossman et al 1998, Olson and Dinerstein 1998, Abell et al 2000.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Gap Analysis and Comprehensive Conservation Strategy for Riverine Ecosystems of Missouri

Sowa

Annis

Morey

et al. 2007

Ecological Monographs

139

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. North America harbors an astounding proportion of the world's freshwater species, but it is facing a freshwater biodiversity crisis. A first step to slowing the loss of biodiversity involves identifying gaps in existing efforts to conserve biodiversity and prioritizing opportunities to fill these gaps. In this monograph we detail two separate, but complementary, conservation planning efforts-a Gap Analysis (GAP) and a State Wildlife Action Plan (WAP)-for Missouri that address this first step. The goal of the Missouri Aquatic GAP Project was to identify riverine ecosystems, habitats, and species not adequately represented (i.e., gaps) within existing conservation lands. The goal of the freshwater component of the Missouri Wildlife Action Plan was to identify and map a set of conservation-opportunity areas (COAs) that holistically represent all riverine ecosystems, habitats, and species in Missouri. Since conservation planning is a geographical exercise, both efforts utilized geographic information systems (GIS). Four principal GIS data sets were used in each planning effort: (1) a hierarchical riverine ecosystem classification, (2) predicted species distributions, (3) public ownership/stewardship, and (4) a human-threat index. Results of the gap analyses are not encouraging. Forty five, mostly rare, threatened, or endangered, species are not represented in lands set aside for conserving biodiversity. Results also illustrate the fragmented nature of conservation lands, which are mainly situated in the uplands and fail to provide connectivity among riverine habitats. Furthermore, many conservation lands are severely threatened by an array of human disturbances. In contrast, results of the WAP provide hope that relatively intact riverine ecosystems still exist. A total of 158 COAs, representing ;6% of the total kilometers of stream in Missouri, were selected for the WAP. This illustrates that a wide spectrum of biodiversity can be represented within a small portion of the total resource base, but the area of conservation concern is often much larger. Identifying priority riverscapes for conservation is an important first step toward effective biodiversity conservation. Yet, achieving the ultimate goal of conserving biodiversity will require vigilance on the part of all responsible parties, with particular attention to addressing and coordinating the many remaining logistical tasks.

show abstract

“…A growing body of literature suggests that the patterns of distribution for many fishes are the result of both local-habitat conditions and largerscale biotic and abiotic processes (e.g., Rabeni and Sowa 1996;Dunham et al 1997;Schrank et al 2001). The physical characteristics of streams at the small scale of individual habitat units or stream reaches have often been associated with variation in fish density (e.g., Rabeni and Sowa 1996;Watson and Hillman 1997).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The physical characteristics of streams at the small scale of individual habitat units or stream reaches have often been associated with variation in fish density (e.g., Rabeni and Sowa 1996;Watson and Hillman 1997). However, large-scale watershed or landscape features such as stream size, basin area, spatial geometry, and stream temperature or surrogates for climate (Bozek and Hubert 1992;Fausch et al 1994;Rieman and McIntyre 1995;Dunham et al 1997Harig and Fausch 2002) as well as biotic factors such as the presence of nonnative species and degree of isolation from other populations (Osborne and Wiley 1992;Schrank et al 2001) have also been implicated.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, large-scale watershed or landscape features such as stream size, basin area, spatial geometry, and stream temperature or surrogates for climate (Bozek and Hubert 1992;Fausch et al 1994;Rieman and McIntyre 1995;Dunham et al 1997Harig and Fausch 2002) as well as biotic factors such as the presence of nonnative species and degree of isolation from other populations (Osborne and Wiley 1992;Schrank et al 2001) have also been implicated. Large-scale processes are likely to be important because landscape features influence (1) local-scale habitat features (Rabeni and Sowa 1996), (2) species interactions or individual physiological responses (Fausch et al 1994), and (3) dispersal, colonization, and gene flow within and among local populations (Luttrell et al 1999;Rieman and Dunham 2000).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Local‐Habitat, Watershed, and Biotic Features Associated with Bull Trout Occurrence in Montana Streams

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.-We evaluated the association of local-habitat features, large-scale watershed factors, the presence of nonnative brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis, and connectivity to neighboring populations with patterns of occurrence of threatened bull trout S. confluentus in 112 first-order to fourthorder streams in the Bitterroot River drainage in western Montana. Species presence or absence was estimated via single-pass electrofishing, local-habitat features were measured in 500-m sampling reaches, watershed variables were obtained from topographic maps, and potential demographic support from nearby bull trout populations occupying larger main-stem streams was estimated from electrofishing data records. We defined a set of nine candidate models that represented various combinations of these four main factors and used an information-theoretic approach to evaluate the relative plausibility of competing models. Models combining local habitat (width, gradient, and woody debris) with brook trout presence and the main-stem abundance of bull trout and a global model (all variables) were the best approximating models. In contrast, watershed models based on elevation, basin area, and tributary slope and models with local-habitat or biotic variables alone were poor predictors of bull trout occurrence. Bull trout occurrence was positively associated with channel width, large woody debris, and the presence of a ''strong'' neighboring main-stem population and negatively associated with channel gradient and the presence of brook trout. Our findings suggest that bull trout have increased resistance to invasion by brook trout in streams with high habitat complexity and connectivity. Consideration of abiotic and biotic factors at multiple scales, along with a means for ranking their relative importance, is needed to perform more comprehensive assessments of landscape and local influences on species distribution patterns.

show abstract

Integrating biological realism into habitat restoration and conservation strategies for small streams

Cited by 85 publications

References 31 publications

Conserving indigenous crayfish: stock assessment and habitat requirements in the threatened Austropotamobius italicus

Conserving indigenous crayfish: stock assessment and habitat requirements in the threatened Austropotamobius italicus

A Gap Analysis and Comprehensive Conservation Strategy for Riverine Ecosystems of Missouri

Local‐Habitat, Watershed, and Biotic Features Associated with Bull Trout Occurrence in Montana Streams

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About