The role of lateral connectivity in the maintenance of macrophyte diversity and production in large rivers

Large European river floodplains have been intensively reduced through human activities over several millennia. Ecological assessments of natural large river systems remain rare and potentially flawed since they typically omit either the main channel of the river or, more commonly, aquatic habitats that occur naturally in the floodplain of dynamic systems. Surveys were conducted over a longitudinal and lateral gradient to assess distribution, richness and production of macrophytes along two little-disturbed large upland rivers in Scotland. Lateral dynamics, through the creation of backwaters, underpinned the occurrence, abundance and production of macrophytes in these rivers. Indeed, backwaters, despite representing only 5% of the total area of aquatic habitat, supported a significantly higher concentration of species (65% of species recorded at the riverscape scale were unique to backwaters) than the main channel. The frequency with which backwaters were connected to the main channel during flood flows influenced their species richness. Highest species richness in backwaters was typically found at low connectivity. Standing crop in backwaters was 150 times higher per unit area than in the main channel, while at the riverscape scale backwaters accounted for an average 89% of aquatic plant biomass. The highest plant biomass was found at low and medium connectivity with the main channel. Backwaters appear to be crucial habitats in maintaining macrophyte diversity and production in large river ecosystems. These results emphasize the importance of river hydrodynamics and lateral connectivity in maintaining macrophyte community diversity along large rivers. The results illustrate also the potentially very significant role of backwaters as source habitats supplying propagules and organic matter to downstream reaches. It is argued that the entire riverscape (floodplain plus main channel) must be considered in the holistic assessment of such systems, while protection of this resource requires greater recognition of linkages within and across habitats, both aquatic and terrestrial, to be effective. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[2]  M. Dixon,et al.  HISTORIC CHANGES (1941–2008) IN SIDE CHANNEL AND BACKWATER HABITATS ON AN UNCHANNELIZED REACH OF THE MISSOURI RIVER , 2013 .

[3]  Elizabeth P. ANDERSONa,et al.  AQUATIC CONSERVATION: MARINE AND FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS , 2013 .

[4]  N. Willby,et al.  Harmonising the bioassessment of large rivers in the absence of near‐natural reference conditions – a case study of the Danube River , 2012 .

[5]  N. Willby.  From metrics to Monet: the need for an ecologically meaningful guiding image , 2011 .

[6]  P. Filzmoser,et al.  Characterisation of the potamal Danube River and the Delta: connectivity determines indicative macrophyte assemblages , 2011, Hydrobiologia.

[7]  G. Janauer,et al.  Aquatic macrophytes and water current velocity in the Danube River , 2010 .

[8]  Alison Lee,et al.  Falling through the cracks: are European directives and international conventions the panacea for freshwater nature conservation? , 2010 .

[9]  G. Bugbee,et al.  The relative importance of local conditions and regional processes in structuring aquatic plant communities , 2010 .

[10]  G. Janauer,et al.  Adapting floodplain connectivity conditions - a prerequisite for sustaining aquatic macrophyte diversity in the UNESCO Biosphere Reserve Lobau (Austria). , 2009 .

[11]  Paul Whitehead,et al.  Flow controls on lowland river macrophytes: a review. , 2008, The Science of the total environment.

[12]  J. Haury,et al.  Local distribution of macrophytes and consequences for sampling methods in large rivers , 2008, Hydrobiologia.

[13]  F. Pick,et al.  Predicting diversity versus community composition of aquatic plants at the river scale , 2008 .

[14]  Georg A. Janauer,et al.  Aquatic macrophytes and hydro-electric power station reservoirs in regulated rivers: man-made ecological compensation structures and the “ecological potential” , 2008 .

[15]  Thomas Hein,et al.  The significance of side‐arm connectivity for carbon dynamics of the River Danube, Austria , 2007 .

[16]  I. G. Cowx,et al.  Benefits to 0+ fishes of connecting man‐made waterbodies to the lower River Trent, England , 2007 .

[17]  M. Bowes,et al.  How green is my river? A new paradigm of eutrophication in rivers. , 2006, The Science of the total environment.

[18]  D. Gilvear,et al.  Channel dynamics and geomorphic variability as controls on gravel bar vegetation; River Tummel, Scotland , 2006 .

[19]  M. Delong,et al.  The riverine ecosystem synthesis: biocomplexity in river networks across space and time , 2006 .

[20]  D. Harper,et al.  Distribution of aquatic vascular plants in lowland rivers: separating the effects of local environmental conditions, longitudinal connectivity and river basin isolation , 2005 .

[21]  Severin Hohensinner,et al.  Reconstruction of the characteristics of a natural alluvial river–floodplain system and hydromorphological changes following human modifications: the Danube River (1812–1991) , 2004 .

[22]  S. Larsen,et al.  Plant distribution and abundance in relation to physical conditions and location within Danish stream systems , 2001, Hydrobiologia.

[23]  J. Battle,et al.  Decomposition dynamics of aquatic macrophytes in the lower Atchafalaya, a large floodplain river , 2004, Hydrobiologia.

[24]  G. Bornette,et al.  Species traits and recolonization processes after flood disturbances in riverine macrophytes , 2004, Vegetatio.

[25]  Jürgen Meyerhoff,et al.  The River Elbe in Germany : present state, conflicting goals, and perspectives of rehabilitation , 2003 .

[26]  K. Tockner,et al.  Habitat change in braided flood plains (Tagliamento, NE-Italy) , 2003 .

[27]  Tenna Riis,et al.  Hydrologic and hydraulic control of macrophyte establishment and performance in streams , 2003 .

[28]  W. Wanek,et al.  Allochthonous and autochthonous particulate organic matter in floodplains of the River Danube: the importance of hydrological connectivity , 2003 .

[29]  K. Tockner,et al.  Riverine flood plains: present state and future trends , 2002, Environmental Conservation.

[30]  G. Bornette,et al.  Connectivity and biocomplexity in waterbodies of riverine floodplains , 2002 .

[31]  K. Tockner,et al.  Riverine landscape diversity , 2002 .

[32]  R. E. Grift,et al.  Restoration strategies for river floodplains along large lowland rivers in Europe , 2002 .

[33]  J. Roelofs,et al.  Constructed shallow zones along navigation canals: vegetation establishment and change in relation to environmental characteristics , 2001 .

[34]  Ward,et al.  Biodiversity: towards a unifying theme for river ecology , 2001 .

[35]  Robin W. Tyser,et al.  Changes in backwater plant communities from 1975 to 1995 in Navigation Pool 8, Upper Mississippi River , 2001 .

[36]  A. Robertson,et al.  The responses of floodplain primary production to flood frequency and timing , 2001 .

[37]  K. Tockner,et al.  An extension of the flood pulse concept. , 2000 .

[38]  F. Richard Hauer,et al.  United Kingdom Floodplains , 2000 .

[39]  Barbara L. Bedford,et al.  PATTERNS IN NUTRIENT AVAILABILITY AND PLANT DIVERSITY OF TEMPERATE NORTH AMERICAN WETLANDS , 1999 .

[40]  K. Tockner,et al.  Hydrological connectivity, and the exchange of organic matter and nutrients in a dynamic river–floodplain system (Danube, Austria) , 1999 .

[41]  F. Mouillot,et al.  Flood drift and propagule bank of aquatic macrophytes in a riverine wetland , 1998 .

[42]  H. Piégay,et al.  Ecological complexity of wetlands within a river landscape , 1998 .

[43]  A revised classification system for British rivers based on their aquatic plant communities , 1998 .

[44]  N. Lamouroux,et al.  Aquatic plant diversity in riverine wetlands: the role of connectivity , 1998 .

[45]  D. Pont,et al.  Hydrosedimentary classification of natural and engineered backwaters of a large river, the lower Rhône : Possible applications for the maintenance of high fish biodiversity , 1997 .

[46]  M. Trémolières,et al.  Species richness of aquatic macrophytes in former channels connected to a river: a comparison between two fluvial hydrosystems differing in their regime and regulation , 1997 .

[47]  S. Winterbottom,et al.  Channel change and flood events since 1783 on the regulated river tay, Scotland: Implications for flood hazard management , 1992 .

[48]  M. Palmer,et al.  A botanical classification of standing waters in Britain: Applications for conservation and monitoring , 1992 .

[49]  H. R. Hamilton,et al.  Current Velocity and Its Effect on Aquatic Macrophytes in Flowing Waters. , 1991, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[50]  Villeurbanne Cédex.  Aquatic vegetation and hydrology of a braided river floodplain , 1991 .

[51]  W. Junk.  The flood pulse concept in river-floodplain systems , 1989 .

[52]  G. Minshall,et al.  The River Continuum Concept , 1980 .