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

A global agenda for advancing freshwater biodiversity research

Global freshwater biodiversity is declining dramatically, and meeting the challenges of this crisis requires bold goals and the mobilisation of substantial resources. While the reasons are varied, investments in both research and conservation of freshwater biodiversity lag far behind those in the terrestrial and marine realms. Inspired by a global consultation, we identify 15 pressing priority needs, grouped into five research areas, in an effort to support informed stewardship of freshwater biodiversity. The proposed agenda aims to advance freshwater biodiversity research globally as a critical step in improving coordinated actions towards its sustainable management and conservation.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

Projected effects of Climate-change-induced flow alterations on stream macroinvertebrate abundances

Global change has the potential to affect river flow conditions which are fundamental determinants of physical habitats. Predictions of the effects of flow alterations on aquatic biota have mostly been assessed based on species ecological traits (e.g., current preferences), which are difficult to link to quantitative discharge data. Alternatively, we used empirically derived predictive relationships for species’ response to flow to assess the effect of flow alterations due to climate change in two contrasting central European river catchments. Predictive relationships were set up for 294 individual species based on (1) abundance data from 223 sampling sites in the Kinzig lower‐mountainous catchment and 67 sites in the Treene lowland catchment, and (2) flow conditions at these sites described by five flow metrics quantifying the duration, frequency, magnitude, timing and rate of flow events using present‐day gauging data. Species’ abundances were predicted for three periods: (1) baseline (1998–2017), (2) horizon 2050 (2046–2065) and (3) horizon 2090 (2080–2099) based on these empirical relationships and using high‐resolution modeled discharge data for the present and future climate conditions. We compared the differences in predicted abundances among periods for individual species at each site, where the percent change served as a proxy to assess the potential species responses to flow alterations. Climate change was predicted to most strongly affect the low‐flow conditions, leading to decreased abundances of species up to −42%. Finally combining the response of all species over all metrics indicated increasing overall species assemblage responses in 98% of the studied river reaches in both projected horizons and were significantly larger in the lower‐mountainous Kinzig compared to the lowland Treene catchment. Such quantitative analyses of freshwater taxa responses to flow alterations provide valuable tools for predicting potential climate‐change impacts on species abundances and can be applied to any stressor, species, or region

Poor correlation between large-scale environmental flow violations and freshwater biodiversity: implications for water resource management and the freshwater planetary boundary

| openaire: EC/HE/819202/EU//SOS.aquaterra Funding Information: This research has been supported by the Canada First Research Excellence Fund (grant no. C150-2017-8). Funding Information: The authors acknowledge various funds that made this research possible. Chinchu Mohan received funding from the Canada First Research Excellence Fund (CFRE); Matti Kummu received funding from the Academy of Finland funded project WATVUL (grant no. 317320), the Academy of Finland funded project TREFORM (grant no. 339834), and the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement no. 819202). Vili Virkki received funding from the Aalto University School of Engineering Doctoral Program and the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement no. 819202). Sonja C. Jähnig acknowledges funding through the Leibniz Association for the project Freshwater Megafauna Futures. Miina Porkka received funding from European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement no. 819202). Lan Wang-Erlandsson was supported by the European Research Council through the “Earth Resilience in the Anthropocene” project (grant no. ERC-2016-ADG 743080) and by the IKEA Foundation. Publisher Copyright: © Copyright:The freshwater ecosystems around the world are degrading, such that maintaining environmental flow Environmental flow (EF): "The quantity, timing, and quality of water flows required to sustain freshwater and estuarine ecosystems and the human livelihoods and well-being that depend on these ecosystems."- Arthington et al. (2018). (EF) in river networks is critical to their preservation. The relationship between streamflow alterations (subsequent EF violationsEF violations are deviations in streamflow beyond the upper and lower boundaries of environmental flow envelopes (EFEs). The EFEs establish an envelope for acceptable EF deviations based on pre-industrial (1801-1860) stream discharge (see Sect. 2.2 for more details)) and the freshwater biodiversity response is well established at the scale of stream reaches or small basins (g 1/4<100g km2). However, it is unclear if this relationship is robust at larger scales, even though there are large-scale initiatives to legalize the EF requirement. Moreover, EFs have been used in assessing a planetary boundaryPlanetary boundary: planetary boundary defines biogeophysical planetary-scale boundaries for Earth system processes that, if violated, can irretrievably impair the Holocene-like stability of the Earth system. for freshwater. Therefore, this study intends to conduct an exploratory evaluation of the relationship between EF violation and freshwater biodiversity at globally aggregated scales and for freshwater ecoregions. Four EF violation indices (severity, frequency, probability of shifting to a violated state, and probability of staying violated) and seven independent freshwater biodiversity indicators (calculated from observed biota data) were used for correlation analysis. No statistically significant negative relationship between EF violation and freshwater biodiversity was found at global or ecoregion scales. These findings imply the need for a holistic bio-geo-hydro-physical approach in determining the environmental flows. While our results thus suggest that streamflow and EF may not be the only determinant of freshwater biodiversity at large scales, they do not preclude the existence of relationships at smaller scales or with more holistic EF methods (e.g., including water temperature, water quality, intermittency, connectivity, etc.) or with other biodiversity data or metrics.Peer reviewe

Flagship umbrella species needed for the conservation of overlooked aquatic biodiversity

Despite a long-standing debate about the utility of species-centered conservation approaches (Roberge & Angelstam 2004), surrogate species remain popular by providing useful-or even necessary-"shortcuts" for successful conservation programs (Caro 2010). Flagship species, as one prime example of surrogates, are primarily intended to promote public awareness and to raise funds for conservation (Ver\uedssimo et\ua0al. 2011). In contrast, the protection of umbrella species is expected to benefit a wide range of co-occurring species (Roberge & Angelstam 2004; Caro 2010). Accordingly, the main criteria for selecting flagships should be based on socio-cultural considerations, whereas umbrellas are principally chosen based on ecological criteria (Caro 2010; Ver\uedssimo et\ua0al. 2011; see Table 1). Since these two concepts are often confused or mistakenly used interchangeably, Caro (2010, p. 248) coined the term "flagship umbrellas" for those species that explicitly integrate both functions. Indeed, Li and Pimm (2016) recently demonstrated that the classic flagship species, the giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca), can simultaneously act as an umbrella species, as its protection benefits many co-occurring endemic mammals, birds and amphibians. This challenges the often held views that: (i) the umbrella concept has to be abandoned as it is not efficiently working at local scales (Caro 2015); (ii) most flagship species are weak predictors for efficient reserve planning (Caro 2010); and (iii) ecosystem- or landscape-based conservation approaches should consequentially be favored over species-based approaches whenever feasible (Roberge & Angelstam 2004; Caro 2010). Further commotion in the discussion is the increasingly demanded paradigm shift in conservation strategies to specifically target hidden or neglected biodiversity for its intrinsic value and its contribution to ecosystem processes (Dougherty et\ua0al. 2016)

Twenty-five essential research questions to inform the protection and restoration of freshwater biodiversity

Freshwater biodiversity is declining at an unprecedented rate. Freshwater conservationists and environmental managers have enough evidence to demonstrate that action must not be delayed but have insufficient evidence to identify those actions that will be most effective in reversing the current trend. Here, the focus is on identifying essential research topics that, if addressed, will contribute directly to restoring freshwater biodiversity through supporting ‘bending the curve’ actions (i.e. those actions leading to the recovery of freshwater biodiversity, not simply deceleration of the current downward trend). The global freshwater research and management community was asked to identify unanswered research questions that could address knowledge gaps and barriers associated with ‘bending the curve’ actions. The resulting list was refined into six themes and 25 questions. Although context-dependent and potentially limited in global reach, six overarching themes were identified: (i) learning from successes and failures; (ii) improving current practices; (iii) balancing resource needs; (iv) rethinking built environments; (v) reforming policy and investments; and (vi) enabling transformative change. Bold, efficient, science-based actions are necessary to reverse biodiversity loss. We believe that conservation actions will be most effective when supported by sound evidence, and that research and action must complement one another. These questions are intended to guide global freshwater researchers and conservation practitioners, identify key projects and signal research needs to funders and governments. Our questions can act as springboards for multidisciplinary and multisectoral collaborations that will improve the management and restoration of freshwater biodiversity