Responses of multiple structural and functional indicators along three contrasting disturbance gradients

Ecosystem functioning and community structure are recognized as key components of ecosystem integrity, but comprehensive, standardized studies of the responses of both structural and functional indicators to different types of anthropogenic pressures remain rare. Consequently, we lack an empirical basis for (i) identifying when monitoring ecosystem structure alone misses important changes in ecosystem functioning, (ii) recommending sets of structural and functional metrics best suited for detecting ecological change driven by different anthropogenic pressures, and (iii) understanding the cumulative effects of multiple, co-occurring stressors on structure and function. We investigated variation in community structure and ecosystem functioning of stream ecosystems along three gradients (10-16 independent stream sites each) of increasing impact arising from agriculture, forestry and river regulation for hydropower, respectively. For each stream, we quantified variation in (i) the abiotic environment, (ii) community composition of four organism groups and (iii) three basal ecosystem processes underpinning carbon and nutrient cycling in streams. We assessed the responsiveness of multiple biodiversity, community structure and ecosystem functioning indicators based on variance explained and effect size metrics. Along a gradient of increasing agricultural impact, diatoms and fish were the most responsive groups overall, but significant variation was detected in at least one aspect of community composition, abundance and/ or biodiversity of every organism group . In contrast, most of our functional metrics did not vary significantly along the agricultural gradient, possibly due to contrasting, antagonistic effects of increasing nutrient concentrations and turbidity on ecosystem process rates. The exception was detritivore-mediated litter decomposition which increased up to moderate levels of nutrient. Impacts of river regulation were most marked for diatoms, which were responsive to both increasingly frequent hydropeaking and to increasing seasonal river regulation. Among functional indicators, both litter decomposition and algal biomass accrual declined significantly with increasing hydropeaking. Few structural or functional metrics varied with forest management, with macroinvertebrate diversity increasing along the forestry gradient, as did algal and fungal biomass accrual. Together, these findings highlight the challenges of making inferences about the impacts of anthropogenic disturbances at the ecosystem level based on community data alone, and pinpoint the need to identify optimal sets of functional and structural indicators best suited for detecting ecological changes associated with different human activities

Responses of multiple structural and functional indicators along three contrasting disturbance gradients

Ecosystem functioning and community structure are recognized as key components of ecosystem integrity, but comprehensive, standardized studies of the responses of both structural and functional indicators to different types of anthropogenic pressures remain rare. Consequently, we lack an empirical basis for (i) identifying when monitoring ecosystem structure alone misses important changes in ecosystem functioning, (ii) recommending sets of structural and functional metrics best suited for detecting ecological change driven by different anthropogenic pressures, and (iii) understanding the cumulative effects of multiple, co-occurring stressors on structure and function. We investigated variation in community structure and ecosystem functioning of stream ecosystems along three gradients (10–16 independent stream sites each) of increasing impact arising from agriculture, forestry and river regulation for hydropower, respectively. For each stream, we quantified variation in (i) the abiotic environment, (ii) community composition of four organism groups and (iii) three basal ecosystem processes underpinning carbon and nutrient cycling in streams. We assessed the responsiveness of multiple biodiversity, community structure and ecosystem functioning indicators based on variance explained and effect size metrics. Along a gradient of increasing agricultural impact, diatoms and fish were the most responsive groups overall, but significant variation was detected in at least one aspect of community composition, abundance and/ or biodiversity of every organism group . In contrast, most of our functional metrics did not vary significantly along the agricultural gradient, possibly due to contrasting, antagonistic effects of increasing nutrient concentrations and turbidity on ecosystem process rates. The exception was detritivore-mediated litter decomposition which increased up to moderate levels of nutrient. Impacts of river regulation were most marked for diatoms, which were responsive to both increasingly frequent hydropeaking and to increasing seasonal river regulation. Among functional indicators, both litter decomposition and algal biomass accrual declined significantly with increasing hydropeaking. Few structural or functional metrics varied with forest management, with macroinvertebrate diversity increasing along the forestry gradient, as did algal and fungal biomass accrual. Together, these findings highlight the challenges of making inferences about the impacts of anthropogenic disturbances at the ecosystem level based on community data alone, and pinpoint the need to identify optimal sets of functional and structural indicators best suited for detecting ecological changes associated with different human activities

Partitioning spatial, environmental, and community drivers of ecosystem functioning

Context: Community composition, environmental variation, and spatial structuring can influence ecosystem functioning, and ecosystem service delivery. While the role of space in regulating ecosystem functioning is well recognised in theory, it is rarely considered explicitly in empirical studies. Objectives: We evaluated the role of spatial structuring within and between regions in explaining the functioning of 36 reference and human-impacted streams. Methods: We gathered information on regional and local environmental variables, communities (taxonomy and traits), and used variance partitioning analysis to explain seven indicators of ecosystem functioning. Results: Variation in functional indicators was explained not only by environmental variables and community composition, but also by geographic position, with sometimes high joint variation among the explanatory factors. This suggests spatial structuring in ecosystem functioning beyond that attributable to species sorting along environmental gradients. Spatial structuring at the within-region scale potentially arose from movements of species and materials among habitat patches. Spatial structuring at the between-region scale was more pervasive, occurring both in analyses of individual ecosystem processes and of the full functional matrix, and is likely to partly reflect phenotypic variation in the traits of functionally important species. Characterising communities by their traits rather than taxonomy did not increase the total variation explained, but did allow for a better discrimination of the role of space. Conclusions: These results demonstrate the value of accounting for the role of spatial structuring to increase explanatory power in studies of ecosystem processes, and underpin more robust management of the ecosystem services supported by those processes

Rethinking ecosystem service indicators for their application to intermittent rivers

In these times of strong pressure on aquatic ecosystems and water resources due to climate change and water abstraction, intermittent rivers and ephemeral streams (IRES) (rivers that periodically cease to flow and/or dry) have become valuable assets. Indeed, not only do they supply water but they also offer services for humanity. Despite a growing recognition towards IRES, information for assessing their ecosystem services (ES) remains scarce. In a first step, an international interdisciplinary group of researchers developed a methodological framework to acknowledge ES provided by IRES using 109 indicators. A subset of selected ES indicators was then applied to two case studies: the Rio Seco in the Algarve (Portugal) and the Giofyros River in Crete (Greece). This paper discusses the applicability of these indicators, including the temporal and spatial variability of IRES flow regimes. Aspects of the framework, such as the methods and time required for data collection, the nature (demand or supply) and functionality of each indicator are discussed. The new framework accounts for flow intermittence in ES analyses and can help scientists and water managers to i) increase the ease and justification for IRES use in management approaches and ii) improve their conservation and restoration with a comprehensive set of appropriate indicators for IRES. In addition, the comprehensive nature of the proposed indicators ensures that they can be understood by a broad audience and easily applicable. Since they were designed through a public participation process, the setting has been prepared for holistic stakeholder analysis and education around IRES functions and associated ES. From a management point of view, it would be particularly relevant to perform an economic evaluation with this new framework to understand the value of each ES category and their trade-offs. For the scientific community, however, it is important to consider public preferences to design socially accepted policies. The proposed indicators can successfully bridge these elements, hereby establishing a solid basis for the assessment of ES provided by IRES.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Habitat patchiness, ecological connectivity and the uneven recovery of boreal stream ecosystems from an experimental drought

Ongoing climate change is increasing the occurrence and intensity of drought episodes worldwide, including in boreal regions not previously regarded as drought prone, and where the impacts of drought remain poorly understood. Ecological connectivity is one factor that might influence community structure and ecosystem functioning post-drought, by facilitating the recovery of sensitive species via dispersal at both local (e.g. a nearby habitat patch) and regional (from other systems within the same region) scales. In an outdoor mesocosm experiment, we investigated how impacts of drought on boreal stream ecosystems are altered by the spatial arrangement of local habitat patches within stream channels, and variation in ecological connectivity with a regional species pool. We measured basal ecosystem processes underlying carbon and nutrient cycling: (a) algal biomass accrual; (b) microbial respiration; and (c) decomposition of organic matter, and sampled communities of aquatic fungi and benthic invertebrates. An 8-day drought event had strong impacts on both community structure and ecosystem functioning, including algal accrual, leaf decomposition and microbial respiration, with many of these impacts persisting even after water levels had been restored for 3.5 weeks. Enhanced connectivity with the regional species pool and increased aggregation of habitat patches also affected multiple response variables, especially those associated with microbes, and in some cases reduced the effects of drought to a small extent. This indicates that spatial processes might play a role in the resilience of communities and ecosystem functioning, given enough time. These effects were however insufficient to facilitate significant recovery in algal growth before seasonal dieback began in autumn. The limited resilience of ecosystem functioning in our experiment suggests that even short-term droughts can have extended consequences for stream ecosystems in the world's vast boreal region, and especially on the ecosystem processes and services mediated by algal biofilms

A synthesis is emerging between biodiversity–ecosystem function and ecological resilience research: reply to Mori

Letter

Rethinking ecosystem service indicators for their application to intermittent rivers

In these times of strong pressure on aquatic ecosystems and water resources due to climate change and water abstraction, intermittent rivers and ephemeral streams (IRES) (rivers that periodically cease to flow and/or dry) have become valuable assets. Indeed, not only do they supply water but they also offer services for humanity. Despite a growing recognition towards IRES, information for assessing their ecosystem services (ES) remains scarce. In a first step, an international interdisciplinary group of researchers developed a methodological framework to acknowledge ES provided by IRES using 109 indicators. A subset of selected ES indicators was then applied to two case studies: the Rio Seco in the Algarve (Portugal) and the Giofyros River in Crete (Greece). This paper discusses the applicability of these indicators, including the temporal and spatial variability of IRES flow regimes. Aspects of the framework, such as the methods and time required for data collection, the nature (demand or supply) and functionality of each indicator are discussed. The new framework accounts for flowintermittence in ES analyses and can help scientists and water managers to i) increase the ease and justification for IRES use in management approaches and ii) improve their conservation and restoration with a comprehensive set of appropriate indicators for IRES. In addition, the comprehensive nature of the proposed indicators ensures that they can be understood by a broad audience and easily applicable. Since they were designed through a public participation process, the setting has been prepared for holistic stakeholder analysis and education around IRES functions and associated ES. From a management point of view, it would be particularly relevant to perform an economic evaluation with this new framework to understand the value of each ES category and their tradeoffs. For the scientific community, however, it is important to consider public preferences to design socially accepted policies. The proposed indicators can successfully bridge these elements, hereby establishing a solid basis for the assessment of ES provided by IRES

Partitioning spatial, environmental, and community drivers of ecosystem functioning

Context: Community composition, environmental variation, and spatial structuring can influence ecosystem functioning, and ecosystem service delivery. While the role of space in regulating ecosystem functioning is well recognised in theory, it is rarely considered explicitly in empirical studies. Objectives: We evaluated the role of spatial structuring within and between regions in explaining the functioning of 36 reference and human-impacted streams. Methods: We gathered information on regional and local environmental variables, communities (taxonomy and traits), and used variance partitioning analysis to explain seven indicators of ecosystem functioning. Results: Variation in functional indicators was explained not only by environmental variables and community composition, but also by geographic position, with sometimes high joint variation among the explanatory factors. This suggests spatial structuring in ecosystem functioning beyond that attributable to species sorting along environmental gradients. Spatial structuring at the within-region scale potentially arose from movements of species and materials among habitat patches. Spatial structuring at the between-region scale was more pervasive, occurring both in analyses of individual ecosystem processes and of the full functional matrix, and is likely to partly reflect phenotypic variation in the traits of functionally important species. Characterising communities by their traits rather than taxonomy did not increase the total variation explained, but did allow for a better discrimination of the role of space. Conclusions: These results demonstrate the value of accounting for the role of spatial structuring to increase explanatory power in studies of ecosystem processes, and underpin more robust management of the ecosystem services supported by those processes

Partitioning spatial, environmental, and community drivers of ecosystem functioning

Context: Community composition, environmental variation, and spatial structuring can influence ecosystem functioning, and ecosystem service delivery. While the role of space in regulating ecosystem functioning is well recognised in theory, it is rarely considered explicitly in empirical studies. Objectives: We evaluated the role of spatial structuring within and between regions in explaining the functioning of 36 reference and human-impacted streams. Methods: We gathered information on regional and local environmental variables, communities (taxonomy and traits), and used variance partitioning analysis to explain seven indicators of ecosystem functioning. Results: Variation in functional indicators was explained not only by environmental variables and community composition, but also by geographic position, with sometimes high joint variation among the explanatory factors. This suggests spatial structuring in ecosystem functioning beyond that attributable to species sorting along environmental gradients. Spatial structuring at the within-region scale potentially arose from movements of species and materials among habitat patches. Spatial structuring at the between-region scale was more pervasive, occurring both in analyses of individual ecosystem processes and of the full functional matrix, and is likely to partly reflect phenotypic variation in the traits of functionally important species. Characterising communities by their traits rather than taxonomy did not increase the total variation explained, but did allow for a better discrimination of the role of space. Conclusions: These results demonstrate the value of accounting for the role of spatial structuring to increase explanatory power in studies of ecosystem processes, and underpin more robust management of the ecosystem services supported by those processes