Macroinvertebrate Community Condition Associated With the Severity of Streamflow Alteration

Abstract

Natural streamflows play a critical role in stream ecosystems, yet quantitative relations between streamflow alteration and stream health have been elusive. One reason for this difficulty is that neither streamflow alteration nor ecological responses are measured relative to their natural expectations. We assessed macroinvertebrate community condition in 25 mountain streams representing a large gradient of streamflow alteration, which we quantified as the departure of observed flows from natural expectations. Observed flows were obtained from US Geological Survey streamgaging stations and discharge records from dams and diversion structures. During low-flow conditions in September, samples of macroinvertebrate communities were collected at each site, in addition to measures of physical habitat, water chemistry and organic matter. In general, streamflows were artificially high during summer and artificially low throughout the rest of the year. Biological condition, as measured by richness of sensitive taxa (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera) and taxonomic completeness (O/E), was strongly and negatively related to the severity of depleted flows in winter. Analyses of macroinvertebrate traits suggest that taxa losses may have been caused by thermal modification associated with streamflow alteration. Our study yielded quantitative relations between the severity of streamflow alteration and the degree of biological impairment and suggests that water management that reduces streamflows during winter months is likely to have negative effects on downstream benthic communities in Utah mountain streams. Published 2012. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Spatial Pattern and Habitat Requirements of Galaxias maculatus in the Last Un-Interrupted Large River of Patagonia: A Baseline for Management

“…In addition, water regulation should be performed in a way that replicates the natural seasonal flow cycle as closely as possible (Carlisle, Wolock, & Meador, 2010;Carlisle, Nelson, & Eng, 2012;Ward & Stanford, 1982) and fish passage construction should be consider to promote genetic exchange between populations separated by dams. …”

Bringing groundwater models to LIFE: a new way to assess water resource management options

“…As water resource management increasingly considers the environment, it would benefit from quantitative predictions of the ecological effects of river flow alterations. Few studies, however, provide sufficient information to support the development of regional environmental flow frameworks, such as ELOHA (Poff and Zimmerman 2010, Carlisle et al 2012). This study is currently unique in that it uses quantitative relationships between ecology and flow alterations (Bradley et al 2013) and (Bradley et al 2013).…”

“…Defining the limits of river flow alteration to maintain ecological integrity is central to the management of environmental flows. However, quantitative ecological responses to degrees of river flow alteration have rarely been reported (but see Castella et al 1995, Merritt and Poff 2010, Carlisle et al 2012, Bradley et al 2013 and quantitative generalizations that could inform regional or national water management remain elusive (Poff and Zimmerman 2010).…”

Contributions from limnology to reservoir management

“…Además, a menudo dan lugar a un patrón temporal de caudales inverso al natural, con altos caudales en verano y bajos caudales en invierno Belmar et al, 2010), modificando las cadenas tróficas y la productividad del ecosistema fluvial (Wootton et al, 1996). Cuanto mayor sea la intensidad de la alteración mayor será el efecto sobre el número de especies (Carlisle et al, 2012), sobre la calidad del hábitat y del bosque de ribera (Belmar et al, 2013). Los embalses hidroeléctricos, a menudo causan importantes variaciones del caudal turbinado a escala diaria, e incluso semanal, en respuesta a los picos de demanda de consumo eléctrico (Prats et al, 2009), reduciendo el hábitat efectivo disponible y la productividad acuática (Poff et al, 1997).…”