首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


Diverging response patterns of terrestrial and aquatic species to hydromorphological restoration
Authors:Francesca Pilotto  Jonathan D Tonkin  Kathrin Januschke  Armin W Lorenz  Jonas Jourdan  Andrea Sundermann  Daniel Hering  Stefan Stoll  Peter Haase
Institution:1. Department of River Ecology and Conservation, Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Clamecystrasse 12, 63571 Gelnhausen, Germany;2. Department of Integrative Biology, Oregon State University, 3029 Cordley Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331, U.S.A.;3. Department of Aquatic Ecology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Universitätsstrasse 5, 45141 Essen, Germany;4. Department of River Ecology and Conservation, Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Clamecystrasse 12, 63571 Gelnhausen, Germany

Institute of Ecology, Evolution and Diversity, Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany;5. Department of Aquatic Ecology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Universitätsstrasse 5, 45141 Essen, Germany

Environmental Campus Birkenfeld, University of Applied Sciences Trier, Post Box 1380, 55761 Birkenfeld, Germany;6. Department of River Ecology and Conservation, Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Clamecystrasse 12, 63571 Gelnhausen, Germany

Faculty of Biology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Universitätsstrasse 5, 45141 Essen, Germany

Abstract:Although experiences with ecological restoration continue to accumulate, the effectiveness of restoration for biota remains debated. We complemented a traditional taxonomic analysis approach with information on 56 species traits to uncover the responses of 3 aquatic (fish, macroinvertebrates, macrophytes) and 2 terrestrial (carabid beetles, floodplain vegetation) biotic groups to 43 hydromorphological river restoration projects in Germany. All taxonomic groups responded positively to restoration, as shown by increased taxonomic richness (10–164%) and trait diversity (habitat, dispersal and mobility, size, form, life history, and feeding groups) (15–120%). Responses, however, were stronger for terrestrial than aquatic biota, and, contrary to our expectation, taxonomic responses were stronger than those of traits. Nevertheless, trait analysis provided mechanistic insights into the drivers of community change following restoration. Trait analysis for terrestrial biota indicated restoration success was likely enhanced by lateral connectivity and reestablishment of dynamic processes in the floodplain. The weaker response of aquatic biota suggests recovery was hindered by the persistence of stressors in the aquatic environment, such as degraded water quality, dispersal constraints, and insufficient hydromorphological change. Therefore, river restoration requires combined local- and regional-scale approaches to maximize the response of both aquatic and terrestrial organisms. Due to the contrasting responses of aquatic and terrestrial biota, the planning and assessment of river restoration outcomes should consider effects on both components of riverine landscapes.
Keywords:functional diversity  multibiotic diversity  riparian  river floodplain  stream restoration  taxonomic composition  trait composition  composición de rasgos  composición taxonómica  diversidad funcional  diversidad multibiótica  planicie inundable ribereño  restauración de corriente  ribereño
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号