Influence of submerged macrophytes on sediment composition and near-bed flow in lowland streams

1. Submerged macrophytes have important physical and structural effects on lowland streams. This study investigated the ability of submerged macrophytes to modify the near-bed flow and to retain mineral and organic particles in patches of four common macrophytes in shallow Danish streams during mid-summer. 2. In dense patches of Callitriche cophocarpa and Elodea canadensis, where near-bed velocity was reduced, the sediment surface was markedly raised and enriched with fine particles. In dense patches of Ranunculus peltatus, fine sediments were deposited among rooted shoots in the upstream part of the patches, while erosion and coarse sediments prevailed in the downstream part of the patches because of the strong vortices that formed at the rear and moved up under the trailing canopy. The open canopy of Sparganium emersum, with its streamlined leaves, had little effect on flow and sediment. 3. Patterns of sediment deposition and composition were closely related to the morphology and canopy structure of plant species and the presence of low velocity above the sediment among the rooted shoots. The mineral particles retained probably originate from bed-load, and the enrichment with finer particles within the patches probably results mainly from size-selective processes during erosion and transport of particles rather than during deposition. The mixed sediment composition within patches suggests that the flow-resistant shoots generate an environment conducive to deposition of all transported particles. 4. Fine sediments within macrophyte beds contained high concentrations of organic matter, carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus. The wide scatter in the relationships between mineral grain size and the content of organic matter and nutrients reflects the spatial and temporal complexity of erosion, transport and sedimentation of mineral and organic particles. 5. Enrichment of sediment within macrophyte beds relative to the surrounding substratum ranged from 780 g organic matter m–2, 30 g N m–2 and 25 g P m–2 for the flow-resistant dense canopies af Callitriche cophocarpa to 150 g organic matter m–2, 6.6 g N m–2 and 3.4 g P m–2 for the open canopies of Sparganium emersum. Retention of nutrient-rich particles within the macrophyte beds is probably of limited importance for plant growth in most lowland European streams, because macrophyte growth is rarely nutrient limited.

[1]  J. Sørensen,et al.  Denitrification in nitrate-rich streams: Diurnal and seasonal variation related to benthic oxygen metabolism , 1990 .

[2]  B. Kronvang,et al.  The export of particulate matter, particulate phosphorus and dissolved phosphorus from two agricultural river basins: Implications on estimating the non-point phosphorus load , 1992 .

[3]  T. Hansen,et al.  Quantitative estimates and community structure of invertebrates in a macrophyte rich stream , 1985, Archiv für Hydrobiologie.

[4]  P. Carling,et al.  River hydraulics, sediment transport and training works : their ecological relevance to European rivers , 1996 .

[5]  J. Sørensen,et al.  Denitrification in sediment of lowland streams: regional and seasonal variation in Gelbaek and Rabis Baek, Denmark , 1988 .

[6]  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.

[7]  E. Prepas,et al.  Temporal and Spatial Dynamics in Riverbed Chemistry: The Influence of Flow and Sediment Composition , 1992 .

[8]  Erik Jeppesen,et al.  Growth of macrophytes and ecosystem consequences in a lowland Danish stream , 1989 .

[9]  K. Sand‐Jensen,et al.  Fine-scale patterns of water velocity within macrophyte patches in streams , 1996 .

[10]  Mahlon G. Kelly,et al.  Light and the annual variation of oxygen‐ and carbon‐based measurements of productivity in a macrophyte‐dominated river1 , 1983 .

[11]  J. Quinn,et al.  Hydraulic parameters and benthic invertebrate distributions in two gravel‐bed New Zealand rivers , 1994 .

[12]  F. H. Dawson The annual production of the aquatic macrophyte Ranunculus penicillatus var. Calcareus (R.W. Butcher) C.D.K. Cook , 1976 .

[13]  H. R. Hamilton,et al.  Roots versus shoots in nutrient uptake by aquatic macrophytes in flowing waters , 1989 .

[14]  E. Prepas,et al.  Nutrient dynamics in riverbeds: The impact of sewage effluent and aquatic macrophytes , 1994 .

[15]  K. Sand‐Jensen,et al.  Patch dynamics of the stream macrophyte, Callitriche cophocarpa , 1992 .

[16]  E. Mortensen Density-dependent mortality of trout fry (Salmo trutta L.) and its relationship to the management of small streams. , 1977 .

[17]  R. Butcher Studies on the Ecology of Rivers: I. On the Distribution of Macrophytic Vegetation in the Rivers of Britain , 1933 .

[18]  C. Duarte Nutrient concentration of aquatic plants: Patterns across species , 1992 .

[19]  Hans Ole Hansen,et al.  European rivers and lakes : assessment of their environmental state , 1994 .

[20]  L. M. Svendsen,et al.  Dynamics of phosphorus compounds in a lowland river system: Importance of retention and non‐point sources , 1995 .