Structure of interstitial assemblages in a regulated channel of the river rhine (France)

Châtelliers, Michel Creuzé des; Marmonier, Pierre; Dole‐Olivier, M. ‐J.; Castella, Emmanuel

doi:10.1002/rrr.3450070105

Cited by 14 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Herzog (1938) described a diverse interstitial fauna (more than twenty hypogean species) on a floodplain of the Rhine River. Now the metal‐contaminated floodplain has only an impoverished fauna ( Creuzé des Châtelliers et al . 1992 ), in which epigean microcrustaceans are dominant, insects are rare, and strongly hypogean forms are absent.…”

Section: The Faunamentioning

confidence: 99%

The boundaries of river systems: the metazoan perspective

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary 1. This overview of metazoans associated with the riparian/groundwater interface focuses on the fauna inhabiting substratum interstices within the stream bed and in alluvial aquifers beneath the floodplain. The objective is to integrate knowledge of habitat conditions and ecology of the interstitial fauna into a broad spatiotemporal perspective of lotic ecosystems. 2. Most aquatic metazoans of terrestrial ancestry, secondarily aquatic forms including insects and water mites (Hydracarina), are largely confined to surface waters (epigean), most of the time penetrating only the superficial interstices of the stream bed. 3. Primary aquatic metazoans include crustaceans and other groups whose entire evolutionary histories took place in water. Some species are epigean, whereas other members of the primary aquatic fauna are true subterranean forms (hypogean), residing deep within the stream bed and in alluvial aquifers some distance laterally from the channel. 4. The hypogean/epigean affinities of interstitial animals are reflected in repetitive gradients of species distribution patterns along vertical (depth within the stream bed), longitudinal (riffle/pool), and lateral (across the floodplain) spatial dimensions, as well as along recovery trajectories following floods (temporal dimension). 5. Fluvial dynamics and sediment characteristics interact to determine hydraulic conductivity, oxygen levels, pore space, particle size heterogeneity, organic content and other habitat conditions within the interstitial milieu. 6. Multidimensional environmental gradients occur at various scales across riparian/groundwater boundary zones. The spatiotemporal variability of hydrogeomorphological processes plays an important role in determining habitat heterogeneity, habitat stability, and connectivity between habitat patches, thereby structuring biodiversity patterns across the riverine landscape. 7. The erosive action of flooding maintains a diversity of hydrarch and riparian successional stages in alluvial floodplains. The patchy distribution patterns of interstitial communities at the floodplain scale reflect, in part, the spatial heterogeneity engendered by successional processes. 8. Interstitial metazoans engage in passive and active movements between surface waters and ground waters, between aquatic and riparian habitats, and between different habitat types within the lotic system. Some of these are extensive migrations that involve significant exchange of organic matter and energy between ecosystem compartments. 9. The generally high resilience of lotic ecosystems to disturbance is attributable, in part, to high spatiotemporal heterogeneity. Habitat patches less affected by a particular perturbation may serve as ’refugia ‘; from which survivors recolonize more severely affected areas. Mechanisms of refugium use may also occur within habitats, as, for example, through ontogenetic shifts in microhabitat use. Rigorous investigations of interstitial habitats as refugia should lead to a clearer understanding of the roles of d...

show abstract

Section: The Faunamentioning

confidence: 99%

The boundaries of river systems: the metazoan perspective

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Channel topography also determines species-rich chironomid community in this stream seems to be organized around rapid changes in species the positions of up-and downwelling zones and thus influences the spatial distribution of the interstitial composition, different life-history strategies, resource utilization and species-specific dispersal patterns in fauna, in combination with other factors such as the content of fine substrate, POM and dissolved oxygen connection with the influence of riverine disturbance, which creates dynamic resource patches and induces (Godbout & Hynes, 1982;Williams, 1989;Creuzé des Châtelliers & Reygrobellet, 1990; Creuzé des random colonization (Schmid, 1993). Nevertheless, we do not know how far the hyporheic zone is colonized Châtelliers, 1991;Marmonier, 1991;Boulton, Valett & Fisher, 1992;Creuzé des Châtelliers et al, 1992; Doleby a community characterized by specific structures and biological interactions, or whether it merely offers Olivier & Marmonier, 1992a). The abundance and species richness of stygobiont species increase graduenvironmental conditions that can be exploited by an array of different interacting taxa, resulting in local ally from influent to effluent zones (Dole-Olivier, Creuzé des Châtelliers & Marmonier, 1993).…”

Section: The Surface Water-groundwater Interfacementioning

confidence: 99%

“…These subsurface flows extend direct cona river along the floodplain and into the depth of an alluvial aquifer, but on a microscale of individual nections between rivers and groundwater into the subterranean landscape, and may sustain a high intersampling units faunal distributions may appear patchy because of site-specific discontinuities (Bretschko, stitial biodiversity and biomass by delivering resources. Ward, Stanford & Voelz (1994) propose that 1991a; Marmonier et al, 1992;). …”

Section: The Surface Water-groundwater Interfacementioning

confidence: 99%

The ecological significance of exchange processes between rivers and groundwater

1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

S U M M A R Y1. This review focuses on the connectivity between river and groundwater ecosystems, viewing them as linked components of a hydrological continuum. Ecological processes that maintain the integrity of both systems and those that are mediated by their ecotones are evaluated. 2. The hyporheic zone, as the connecting ecotone, shows diverse gradients. Thus it can be characterized by hydrological, chemical, zoological and metabolic criteria. However, the characteristics of the hyporheic zone tend to vary widely in space and time as well as from system to system. The exact limits are difficult to designate and the construction of static concepts is inadequate for the representation of ecological processes. The hyporheic interstices are functionally a part of both the fluvial and groundwater ecosystems. 3. The permeability of the ecotone depends on the hydraulic conductivity of the sediment layers which, because of their heterogeneity, form many flowpath connections between the stream and the catchment, from the small scale of a single microhabitat to the large scale of an entire alluvial aquifer. Local up-and downwellings are determined by geomorphologic features such as streambed topography, whereas large-scale exchange processes are determined mainly by the geological properties of the catchment. Colmation-clogging of the top layer of the channel sediments-includes all processes leading to a reduction of pore volume, consolidation of the sediment matrix, and decreased permeability of the stream bed. Consequently, colmation can hinder exchange processes between surface water and groundwater. 4. Physicochemical gradients in the interstices result from several processes: (i) hyporheic flow pattern and the different properties of surface and groundwaters; (ii) retention, caused by the filtering effect of pore size and lithologic sorption as well as the transient storage of solutes caused by diminished water velocities; (iii) biogeochemical transformations in conjunction with local residence time. Each physicochemical parameter may develop its own vertical dynamics laterally from the active channel into the banks as well as longitudinally because of geomorphologic changes. 5. The river-groundwater interface can act as a source or sink for dissolved organic matter, depending on the volume and direction of flow, dissolved organic carbon concentrations and biotic activity. Interstitial storage of particulate organic matter is influenced mainly by grain size distribution and by spates involving bedload movement that may import or release matter, depending on the season. After initial transient and abiotic storage, hyporheic organic matter is mobilized and transformed by the biota. 2 M. Brunke and T. GonserMicro-organisms account for over 90% of the community respiration. In subterranean waters most bacteria are attached to surfaces and remain in a biofilm. 6. Hyporheic interstices are functionally significant for phreatic and riverine metazoans because they act as a refuge against adverse conditions. The net flo...

show abstract

Substratum‐associated microbiota

Tuchman¹,

Peterson²

1993

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Structure of interstitial assemblages in a regulated channel of the river rhine (France)

Cited by 14 publications

References 10 publications

The boundaries of river systems: the metazoan perspective

The boundaries of river systems: the metazoan perspective

The ecological significance of exchange processes between rivers and groundwater

Substratum‐associated microbiota

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About