DISPERSE, a trait database to assess the dispersal potential of European aquatic macroinvertebrates

Dispersal is an essential process in population and community dynamics, but is difficult to measure in the field. In freshwater ecosystems, information on biological traits related to organisms’ morphology, life history and behaviour provides useful dispersal proxies, but information remains scattered or unpublished for many taxa. We compiled information on multiple dispersal-related biological traits of European aquatic macroinvertebrates in a unique resource, the DISPERSE database. DISPERSE includes nine dispersal-related traits subdivided into 39 trait categories for 480 taxa, including Annelida, Mollusca, Platyhelminthes, and Arthropoda such as Crustacea and Insecta, generally at the genus level. Information within DISPERSE can be used to address fundamental research questions in metapopulation ecology, metacommunity ecology, macroecology and evolutionary ecology. Information on dispersal proxies can be applied to improve predictions of ecological responses to global change, and to inform improvements to biomonitoring, conservation and management strategies. The diverse sources used in DISPERSE complement existing trait databases by providing new information on dispersal traits, most of which would not otherwise be accessible to the scientific community. Measurement(s): dispersal • movement quality • morphological feature • behavioral quality Technology Type(s): digital curation Factor Type(s): taxon Sample Characteristic - Organism: Arthropoda • Mollusca • Annelida Sample Characteristic - Environment: aquatic biome • freshwater biome Sample Characteristic - Location: Europe Machine-accessible metadata file describing the reported data: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1314833

The recovery of European freshwater biodiversity has come to a halt

Owing to a long history of anthropogenic pressures, freshwater ecosystems are among the most vulnerable to biodiversity loss1. Mitigation measures, including wastewater treatment and hydromorphological restoration, have aimed to improve environmental quality and foster the recovery of freshwater biodiversity2. Here, using 1,816 time series of freshwater invertebrate communities collected across 22 European countries between 1968 and 2020, we quantified temporal trends in taxonomic and functional diversity and their responses to environmental pressures and gradients. We observed overall increases in taxon richness (0.73% per year), functional richness (2.4% per year) and abundance (1.17% per year). However, these increases primarily occurred before the 2010s, and have since plateaued. Freshwater communities downstream of dams, urban areas and cropland were less likely to experience recovery. Communities at sites with faster rates of warming had fewer gains in taxon richness, functional richness and abundance. Although biodiversity gains in the 1990s and 2000s probably reflect the effectiveness of water-quality improvements and restoration projects, the decelerating trajectory in the 2010s suggests that the current measures offer diminishing returns. Given new and persistent pressures on freshwater ecosystems, including emerging pollutants, climate change and the spread of invasive species, we call for additional mitigation to revive the recovery of freshwater biodiversity.publishedVersio

Time series of freshwater macroinvertebrate abundances and site characteristics of European streams and rivers

Freshwater macroinvertebrates are a diverse group and play key ecological roles, including accelerating nutrient cycling, filtering water, controlling primary producers, and providing food for predators. Their differences in tolerances and short generation times manifest in rapid community responses to change. Macroinvertebrate community composition is an indicator of water quality. In Europe, efforts to improve water quality following environmental legislation, primarily starting in the 1980s, may have driven a recovery of macroinvertebrate communities. Towards understanding temporal and spatial variation of these organisms, we compiled the TREAM dataset (Time seRies of European freshwAter Macroinvertebrates), consisting of macroinvertebrate community time series from 1,816 river and stream sites (mean length of 19.2 years and 14.9 sampling years) of 22 European countries sampled between 1968 and 2020. In total, the data include >93 million sampled individuals of 2,648 taxa from 959 genera and 212 families. These data can be used to test questions ranging from identifying drivers of the population dynamics of specific taxa to assessing the success of legislative and management restoration efforts.Nathalie Kaffenberger aided in initial data compilation. Funding for authors, data collection and processing was provided by the EU Horizon 2020 project eLTER PLUS (grant agreement no. 871128), German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; 033W034A), German Research Foundation (DFG FZT 118, 202548816), the Collaborative Research Centre 1439 RESIST (DFG—SFB 1439/1 2021 –426547801), Czech Republic project no. GA23-05268S, the Leibniz Competition (J45/2018, P74/2018), the Spanish Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad - Agencia Estatal de Investigación and the European Regional Development Fund (MECODISPER project CTM 2017-89295-P), Ramón y Cajal contracts and the project funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (RYC2019-027446-I, RYC2020-029829-I, PID2020-115830GB-100), the Danish Environment Agency, the Norwegian Environment Agency, SOMINCOR – Lundin mining & FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, Portugal, the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, the Swiss National Science Foundation (Grant PP00P3_179089), the EU LIFE programme (DIVAQUA project - LIFE18 NAT/ES/000121), and the UK Natural Environment Research Council (GLiTRS project -NE/V006886/1 and NE/R016429/1 as part of the UK-SCAPE programme), the Autonomous Province of Bolzano (Italy), Estonian Research Council (grant No PRG1266), Estonian national program ‘Humanitarian and natural science collections’. The Environment Agency of England, the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency and Natural Resources Wales provided publicly available data. The collection of data from the Rhône River in France was greatly aided by Marie-Claude Roger (INRAE Lyon), Jean-Claude Berger (INRAE AIX), and Pâquerette Dessaix (ARALEP). We are also grateful to the French Regional Environment Directorates (DREALs) for their collaboration in harmonising the long-term data series from the other French rivers. We thank the AWEL from the Canton of Zurich for providing access to macroinvertebrate data from the AWEL monitoring scheme. We acknowledge the Flanders Environment Agency, the Rhineland-Palatinate State Office for the Environment and the Bulgarian Executive Environment Agency for providing data. This manuscript is a contribution of the Alliance for Freshwater Life (www.allianceforfreshwaterlife.org). Any views expressed within this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of their respective employer organisations.Peer reviewe

The recovery of European freshwater biodiversity has come to a halt

Owing to a long history of anthropogenic pressures, freshwater ecosystems are among the most vulnerable to biodiversity loss1. Mitigation measures, including wastewater treatment and hydromorphological restoration, have aimed to improve environmental quality and foster the recovery of freshwater biodiversity2. Here, using 1,816 time series of freshwater invertebrate communities collected across 22 European countries between 1968 and 2020, we quantified temporal trends in taxonomic and functional diversity and their responses to environmental pressures and gradients. We observed overall increases in taxon richness (0.73% per year), functional richness (2.4% per year) and abundance (1.17% per year). However, these increases primarily occurred before the 2010s, and have since plateaued. Freshwater communities downstream of dams, urban areas and cropland were less likely to experience recovery. Communities at sites with faster rates of warming had fewer gains in taxon richness, functional richness and abundance. Although biodiversity gains in the 1990s and 2000s probably reflect the effectiveness of water-quality improvements and restoration projects, the decelerating trajectory in the 2010s suggests that the current measures offer diminishing returns. Given new and persistent pressures on freshwater ecosystems, including emerging pollutants, climate change and the spread of invasive species, we call for additional mitigation to revive the recovery of freshwater biodiversity.N. Kaffenberger helped with initial data compilation. Funding for authors and data collection and processing was provided by the EU Horizon 2020 project eLTER PLUS (grant agreement no. 871128); the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; 033W034A); the German Research Foundation (DFG FZT 118, 202548816); Czech Republic project no. P505-20-17305S; the Leibniz Competition (J45/2018, P74/2018); the Spanish Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad—Agencia Estatal de Investigación and the European Regional Development Fund (MECODISPER project CTM 2017-89295-P); Ramón y Cajal contracts and the project funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (RYC2019-027446-I, RYC2020-029829-I, PID2020-115830GB-100); the Danish Environment Agency; the Norwegian Environment Agency; SOMINCOR—Lundin mining & FCT—Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, Portugal; the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences; the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant PP00P3_179089); the EU LIFE programme (DIVAQUA project, LIFE18 NAT/ES/000121); the UK Natural Environment Research Council (GLiTRS project NE/V006886/1 and NE/R016429/1 as part of the UK-SCAPE programme); the Autonomous Province of Bolzano (Italy); and the Estonian Research Council (grant no. PRG1266), Estonian National Program ‘Humanitarian and natural science collections’. The Environment Agency of England, the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency and Natural Resources Wales provided publicly available data. We acknowledge the members of the Flanders Environment Agency for providing data. This article is a contribution of the Alliance for Freshwater Life (www.allianceforfreshwaterlife.org).Peer reviewe

Leptocerina Mosely 1932

Key to the species of already-described Leptocerina larva 1 Case cylindrical in cross-section (Hickin 1956, figs 8, 13)..................................................... 2 - Case triangular in cross-section (Figs 1A, 1B)............................................................... 3 2 Case made up of vegetable debris arranged transversally; head coloration almost completely black (similar to Hickin 1948, fig. 1)............................................................................. Leptocerina ramosa trifida - Case generally consisting of twig or hollowed stem; head coloration yellowish with dark longitudinal bands (Hickin 1956, fig. 13)....................................................................................... L. ungandana 3 Triangular ventral apotome posteriorly elongate (Fig. 3C)..................................................... 4 - Triangular ventral apotome wide and not posteriorly elongate (de Moor 2002, fig. 5l; de Moor & Scott 2004, fig. 5.38A).............................................................................................. L. spinigera 4 Hind tarsi with rows of dense, long fringe of swimming setae and ventral row of short, stiff bristles (Fig. 4C)............ 5 - Hind tarsi with short, stiff bristles but without long fringe of swimming setae (Marlier 1956, fig. 2H)............ L. integra 5 Metanotum with well-defined sclerites on setal area 3 (Hickin 1956, fig. 5).......................... L. ramosa pinheyi - Metanotum with ill-defined sclerites on setal area 3 (Figs 3D, 3E)....................................... L. paulianiPublished as part of Forcellini, Maxence, 2021, A Revised Description of the Larva of Leptocerina pauliani (Ross 1957) (Trichoptera: Leptoceridae), an Endemic Species of La Réunion Island, pp. 177-187 in Zootaxa 4981 (1) on page 185, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4981.1.10, http://zenodo.org/record/489750

Leptocerina pauliani

Description of last instar larva The last instar larva of L. pauliani inhabits a case that is triangular in cross-section, made of three pieces of leaf attached by their longitudinal edges (Fig. 2A). [Early instars build a cylindrical case made of sand and diverse plant particles (Fig. 2B)]. Body: Last instar larva length ~ 9.5 mm. Head: Colouration uniformly brown with light-coloured muscle scars and pale circular areas around eyes (Figs 3A–3C). Head elongate, tapering anteriorly, with antennae longer that half of width of frontoclypeal apotome, but not extending beyond anterior edge of labrum (Figs 3B, 3C). Fronto-clypeal apotome narrowly triangular, constricted near mid-length, with pointed posterior apex joining short, asymmetrically curved coronal suture, convex to left (Fig. 3B). Eyes large, dark, simple, surrounded by large, pale, circular areas (Figs 3A, 3B). Pair of subocular ecdysial lines present on head capsule, running under eyes, horizontally reaching posterior part of head and dividing genae into upper and lower parts (Fig. 3A). Labrum yellowish, rectangular, medially indented on anterior edge (Figs 3B, 6A). Mandibles brown, short, shredder-type; left mandible with median short brush, slightly larger than right mandible (Figs 6B, 6C). Anterior ventral apotome forming pear-shaped elongate triangle nearly reaching posteriorly to two small posterior ventral sclerites (Fig. 3C). Thorax: Pronotum brown, concolorous with head capsule, medially divided and with anterolateral corners delimited by pair of slanting ecdysial lines, each starting from middle of lateral edge to reach submedial one-fifth of anterior edge of respective half sclerite (Figs 3D, 3E). Foretrochantins flat, elongate, and finger-shaped (Figs 3A, 3D). Sclerotised mesonotum medially divided, yellowish with brownish muscle scars and pair of conspicuous dark mesonotal bars characteristic of Athripsodini larvae extending from posterolateral corners to midlength; these mesonotal bars nearly parallel, each branching anteriorly to form fork (Fig. 3E). Metanotum membranous and bearing pair of setal area 1 (sa 1) setae submesally (best seen in profile in Figs 3D, 4D); pair of small and ill-defined sclerites, each bearing one long and three small setae, present on setal area 3 (sa 3, Figs 3E, 4F). Pair of dark, transverse intersegmental sclerites between mesosternum and metasternum. Metasternum bearing three pairs of setae, two pairs of sa 3 setae laterally and one pair of sa 2 seta submesally (Fig. 3F, with right submesal seta broken). Forelegs short and stocky; femora broad and with numerous long setae and row of pale strong spine-like setae on ventral margin; these strong setae also present on tibiae and tarsi; tarsal claws simple, short, curved, with prominent basal spine (Fig. 4A). Midlegs longer than forelegs and also with rows of strong spine-like setae on femora, tibiae, and tarsi, and prominent basal spine on each claw (Fig. 4B). Hind legs long and projected forward; rows of strong setae present on only tibiae (Fig. 4C, black arrow) and tarsi; prominent basal spine present on each claw. Hind femora, tibiae, and tarsi each with two rows of dense, long fringes of swimming setae, one row on each of dorsal and ventral margins (Fig. 4C). Abdomen: Segment I bearing one dorsal and two lateral humps (Fig. 4D). Pair of long setae located on each side of dorsal hump (Fig. 3E, black arrows). Each lateral hump with patch of very short brownish spines and two long setae anteriorly and darker, slightly sinuous, longitudinal, sclerotized bar posteriorly (Fig. 4E), similar to patch and bar of larvae of other Athripsodini species. Gills simple (Fig. 4D) and present on abdominal segments II–VII (only two dorsal gills on abdominal segment VII, see Fig. 5A). Lateral fringe composed of dense, long, and fine setae from abdominal segment III to end of segment VII (Fig. 5A). Continuing along line of lateral fringe on each side, row of short lateral tubercles present on abdominal segment VIII (Fig. 5B). Two long, dorsomesal upright setae present on abdominal tergite VIII (Fig. 5E). Abdominal tergite IX bearing one dorsomesal sclerite with three pairs of large setae posteriorly; inner pair of setae longer than others and intermediate pair of setae shortest (Figs 5D, 5E); row of two pairs of short, fine, lighter setae inserted between the row of these three pairs of long black setae and posterior edge of this sclerite. Two short lateral setae present on abdominal sternite IX (slightly visible in profile in Fig. 5D). Anal prolegs short, each with smaller dorsal sclerite and larger sole plate in contact with claw (Figs 5D, 5E). At base of claw insertion, on sole plate, one small and one long seta projecting ventrad (Fig. 5D). Each basal tuft inserted just above claw consisting of four thick and long black setae, mesal seta shorter than other three (Fig. 5D). In ventral view, oblique row of about fifteen upright spines extending from base of claw insertion almost to abdominal sternum IX (Figs 5C, 5F, black arrow). Ventral side of each anal proleg on each side of anus covered with many tight transverse rows of short, flattened spines (Figs 5C, 5F). Anal claws strongly curved and armed apically with three accessory hooks (Figs 5C, 5D).Published as part of Forcellini, Maxence, 2021, A Revised Description of the Larva of Leptocerina pauliani (Ross 1957) (Trichoptera: Leptoceridae), an Endemic Species of La Réunion Island, pp. 177-187 in Zootaxa 4981 (1) on pages 178-179, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4981.1.10, http://zenodo.org/record/489750

A revised description of the larva of <i>Homilia leucophaea</i> (Rambur 1842) (Trichoptera: Leptoceridae) and comparisons with the known western European <i>Athripsodes</i> larvae

International audienceCo-occurrence of mature larvae and male pharate pupae in benthos samples from the Loire River enabled descriptions of the larva of Homilia leucophaea. Using characters of the head capsule, the labrum, the meso- and metanotum, and the pro- and metathoracic legs, we compared H. leucophaea with larvae of six western European Athripsodes species, including a larval key to these species. The larva of H. leucophaea shares characters with some of the six Athripsodes species. However, without a phylogenetic analysis including larvae, pupae, and adults of Homilia species from the Afrotropical Region, it is currently impossible to decide about a potential synonymy between Athripsodes and Homilia

FIGURES 35–36 in A revised description of the larva of Homilia leucophaea (Rambur 1842) (Trichoptera: Leptoceridae) and comparisons with the known western European Athripsodes larvae

FIGURES 35–36. Left metathoracic legs of Athripsodes spp., larval instar V, interior views. (35) complete leg of typical Athripsodes spp., tr: trochanter; fe: femur; (36) trochanter of Athripsodes aterrimus.Published as part of &lt;i&gt;Forcellini, Maxence, Statzner, Bernhard &amp; Tachet, Henri, 2013, A revised description of the larva of Homilia leucophaea (Rambur 1842) (Trichoptera: Leptoceridae) and comparisons with the known western European Athripsodes larvae, pp. 191-199 in Zootaxa 3682 (1)&lt;/i&gt; on page 197, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3682.1.10, &lt;a href="http://zenodo.org/record/10098487"&gt;http://zenodo.org/record/10098487&lt;/a&gt

FIGURES 23–26 in A revised description of the larva of Homilia leucophaea (Rambur 1842) (Trichoptera: Leptoceridae) and comparisons with the known western European Athripsodes larvae

FIGURES 23–26. Mesonota of Athripsodes spp. larvae, instar V, dorsal views. (23) A. albifrons; (24) A. aterrimus; (25) A. braueri; (26) A. cinereus.Published as part of &lt;i&gt;Forcellini, Maxence, Statzner, Bernhard &amp; Tachet, Henri, 2013, A revised description of the larva of Homilia leucophaea (Rambur 1842) (Trichoptera: Leptoceridae) and comparisons with the known western European Athripsodes larvae, pp. 191-199 in Zootaxa 3682 (1)&lt;/i&gt; on page 195, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3682.1.10, &lt;a href="http://zenodo.org/record/10098487"&gt;http://zenodo.org/record/10098487&lt;/a&gt

FIGURES 8–19 in A revised description of the larva of Homilia leucophaea (Rambur 1842) (Trichoptera: Leptoceridae) and comparisons with the known western European Athripsodes larvae

FIGURES 8–19. Heads of Athripsodes spp. larvae, instar V, dorsal and ventral views, respectively. (8 &amp; 9) Athripsodes albifrons; (10 &amp; 11) A. aterrimus; (12 &amp; 13) A. bilineatus; (14 &amp; 15) A. braueri; (16 &amp; 17) A. cinereus; (18 &amp; 19) A. commutatus.Published as part of &lt;i&gt;Forcellini, Maxence, Statzner, Bernhard &amp; Tachet, Henri, 2013, A revised description of the larva of Homilia leucophaea (Rambur 1842) (Trichoptera: Leptoceridae) and comparisons with the known western European Athripsodes larvae, pp. 191-199 in Zootaxa 3682 (1)&lt;/i&gt; on page 194, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3682.1.10, &lt;a href="http://zenodo.org/record/10098487"&gt;http://zenodo.org/record/10098487&lt;/a&gt