Tracking global change in ecosystem area: The Wetland Extent Trends index

Headwater streams and wetlands are integral components of watersheds that are critical for biodiversity, fisheries, ecosystem functions, natural resource‐based economies, and human society and culture. These and other ecosystem services provided by intact and clean headwater streams and wetlands are critical for a sustainable future. Loss of legal protections for these vulnerable ecosystems would create a cascade of consequences, including reduced water quality, impaired ecosystem functioning, and loss of fish habitat for commercial and recreational fish species. Many fish species currently listed as threatened or endangered would face increased risks, and other taxa would become more vulnerable. In most regions of the USA, increased pollution and other impacts to headwaters would have negative economic consequences. Headwaters and the fishes they sustain have major cultural importance for many segments of U.S. society. Native peoples, in particular, have intimate relationships with fish and the streams that support them. Headwaters ecosystems and the natural, socio‐cultural, and economic services they provide are already severely threatened, and would face even more loss under the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule recently proposed by the Trump administration.

show abstract

“…For wetlands outside of floodplains, global estimates indicate continued loss of >30% since 1970 (Dixon et al. ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Headwater Streams and Wetlands are Critical for Sustaining Fish, Fisheries, and Ecosystem Services

Colvin¹,

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the acknowledged role of wetlands in the hydrologic resilience of watersheds, there has been a rapid global decline in wetland area, with an average estimated global loss of wetland area since 1970 of 31% (Dixon et al. ). Furthermore, changes in climate, including projected warmer temperatures, altered precipitation patterns (Millett et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Wetland Location Matter When Managing Wetlands for Watershed‐Scale Flood and Drought Resilience?

Ameli

Creed

2019

J American Water Resour Assoc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wetland protection and restoration strategies that are designed to promote hydrologic resilience do not incorporate the location of wetlands relative to the main stream network. This is primarily attributed to the lack of knowledge on the effects of wetland location on wetland hydrologic function (e.g., flood and drought mitigation). Here, we combined a watershed‐scale, surface–subsurface, fully distributed, physically based hydrologic model with historical, existing, and lost (drained) wetland maps in the Nose Creek watershed in the Prairie Pothole Region of North America to (1) estimate the hydrologic functions of lost wetlands and (2) estimate the hydrologic functions of wetlands located at different distances from the main stream network. Modeling results showed wetland loss altered streamflow, decreasing baseflow and increasing stream peakflow during the period of the precipitation events that led to major flooding in the watershed and downstream cities. In addition, we found that wetlands closer to the main stream network played a disproportionately important role in attenuating peakflow, while wetland location was not important for regulating baseflow. The findings of this study provide information for watershed managers that can help to prioritize wetland restoration efforts for flood or drought risk mitigation.

show abstract

“…4). Marine and inland wetlands cover 552 and 9299 10 3 km 2 , respectively (Dixon et al, 2016;Lehner and Döll, 2004). Performing a simple scaling exercise results in 20 contributions of -140 to 250 and -5 to 33 Gg S yr -1 for fresh and saltwater wetlands, respectively, yielding a total range of -150 to 290 (Table 4).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reviews and Syntheses: Carbonyl Sulfide as a Multi-scale Tracer for Carbon and Water Cycles

Whelan¹,

Lennartz²,

Gimeno³

et al. 2017

Preprint

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. For the past decade, observations of carbonyl sulfide (OCS or COS) have been investigated as a proxy for carbon uptake by plants. OCS is destroyed by enzymes that interact with CO 2 during 25 photosynthesis, namely carbonic anhydrase (CA) and RuBisCO, where CA is the more important. The majority of sources of OCS to the atmosphere are geographically separated from this large plant sink, whereas the sources and sinks of CO 2 are co-located in ecosystems. The drawdown of OCS can therefore be related to the uptake of CO 2 without the added complication of co-located emissions comparable in magnitude. Here we review the state of our understanding of the global OCS cycle and 30 its applications to ecosystem carbon cycle science. OCS uptake is correlated well to plant carbon uptake, especially at the regional scale. OCS can be used in conjunction with other independent measures of ecosystem function, like solar-induced fluorescence and carbon and water isotope studies.More work needs to be done to generate global coverage for OCS observations and to link this powerful Biogeosciences Discuss., https://doi

show abstract

Tracking global change in ecosystem area: The Wetland Extent Trends index

Cited by 221 publications

References 29 publications

Headwater Streams and Wetlands are Critical for Sustaining Fish, Fisheries, and Ecosystem Services

Headwater Streams and Wetlands are Critical for Sustaining Fish, Fisheries, and Ecosystem Services

Does Wetland Location Matter When Managing Wetlands for Watershed‐Scale Flood and Drought Resilience?

Reviews and Syntheses: Carbonyl Sulfide as a Multi-scale Tracer for Carbon and Water Cycles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About