| Literature DB >> 27804095 |
Micael Jonsson1, Ryan M Burrows2,3, Johan Lidman4, Emma Fältström4,5, Hjalmar Laudon2, Ryan A Sponseller4.
Abstract
Land use is known to alter the nature of land-water interactions, but the potential effects of widespread forest management on headwaters in boreal regions remain poorly understood. We evaluated the importance of catchment land use, land cover, and local stream variables for macroinvertebrate community and functional trait diversity in 18 boreal headwater streams. Variation in macroinvertebrate metrics was often best explained by in-stream variables, primarily water chemistry (e.g. pH). However, variation in stream variables was, in turn, significantly associated with catchment-scale forestry land use. More specifically, streams running through catchments that were dominated by young (11-50 years) forests had higher pH, greater organic matter standing stock, higher abundance of aquatic moss, and the highest macroinvertebrate diversity, compared to streams running through recently clear-cut and old forests. This indicates that catchment-scale forest management can modify in-stream habitat conditions with effects on stream macroinvertebrate communities and that characteristics of younger forests may promote conditions that benefit headwater biodiversity.Entities:
Keywords: Aquatic insects; Biodiversity; Forestry; Functional traits
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27804095 PMCID: PMC5347524 DOI: 10.1007/s13280-016-0837-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ambio ISSN: 0044-7447 Impact factor: 6.943
Geographical, land-cover, and land-use characteristics of the study sites and their catchments
| Site | Latitude | Longitude | Elevation (m a.s.l.) | Catchment size (ha) | Land cover (%) | Forest regeneration age class (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forest | Mire | Lake | 0–10 | 11–50 | 51–100 | 101–300 | |||||
| B1 | 64°12′06 | 19°49′43 | 215 | 181.9 | 78.1 | 21.9 | 0 | 12.5 | 17.3 | 54.7 | 9.1 |
| B3 | 64°00′43 | 18°56′32 | 279 | 156.0 | 97.4 | 2.6 | 0 | 2.4 | 42.8 | 45.6 | 7.4 |
| B4 | 64°00′52 | 18°56′50 | 271 | 41.0 | 93.2 | 6.8 | 0 | 57.4 | 9.3 | 21.9 | 9.4 |
| G1 | 63°52′06 | 18°05′23 | 302 | 112.0 | 79.6 | 20.4 | 0 | 5.4 | 28.6 | 47.7 | 10.9 |
| G2 | 63°51′29 | 18°02′25 | 404 | 109.0 | 88.6 | 7.3 | 4.0 | 4.0 | 54.2 | 25.0 | 4.1 |
| G3 | 63°50′43 | 18°02′46 | 415 | 50.0 | 95.6 | 4.4 | 0 | 12.4 | 22.5 | 48.9 | 12.9 |
| KB1 | 64°05′20 | 18°36′15 | 362 | 82.8 | 87.1 | 8.9 | 0 | 2.7 | 26.6 | 49.2 | 8.6 |
| KB8 | 63°59′35 | 18°48′22 | 241 | 64.0 | 79.1 | 20.9 | 0 | 1.2 | 54.6 | 18.8 | 6.3 |
| KR1 | 64°14′55 | 19°48′28 | 223 | 45.0 | 97.9 | 2.1 | 0 | 0.6 | 3.9 | 50.3 | 25.6 |
| KR6 | 64°15′07 | 19°46′16 | 237 | 100.0 | 69.7 | 27.0 | 3.3 | 0 | 0.4 | 30.5 | 52.8 |
| KR7 | 64°14′59 | 19°46′39 | 232 | 47.0 | 82.1 | 17.9 | 0 | 3.0 | 13.4 | 28.9 | 54.6 |
| R1 | 64°07′51 | 20°00′08 | 172 | 392.0 | 88.3 | 11.2 | 0.4 | 10.4 | 24.2 | 49.4 | 7.3 |
| S2 | 64°04′59 | 19°14′24 | 250 | 37.0 | 69.8 | 30.2 | 0 | 0 | 11.2 | 60.7 | 9.5 |
| S6 | 64°05′33 | 19°10′06 | 254 | 89.0 | 96.2 | 3.8 | 0 | 10.2 | 30.6 | 49.0 | 7.0 |
| S16 | 64°07′36 | 19°11′20 | 222 | 593.8 | 59.1 | 40.5 | 0.2 | 10.4 | 20.2 | 37.3 | 13.0 |
| S26 | 64°06′54 | 19°12′28 | 222 | 18.0 | 100.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 36.0 | 42.4 | 21.6 |
| V1 | 64°12′00 | 19°54′20 | 188 | 167.8 | 92.2 | 7.8 | 0 | 9.4 | 26.3 | 53.7 | 8.1 |
| V2 | 64°11′18 | 19°54′32 | 203 | 253.5 | 81.2 | 18.8 | 0 | 5.4 | 30.6 | 50.4 | 6.1 |
|
| 261 | 141.1 | 85.3 | 14.0 | 0.4 | 8.2 | 25.1 | 42.5 | 15.2 | ||
Fig. 1Locations of study sites in northern Sweden, including map coordinates. The inset shows the location of the study region in Sweden
Stream physical characteristics, canopy openness, water chemistry, OM standing stock, bottom substrate characteristics, and macroinvertebrate taxonomic richness and abundance (the sum of all subsamples per site), for the study sites. Dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) represents the sum of NO3-N and NH4-N. SWD small woody debris, DOC dissolved organic carbon, SRP soluble reactive phosphorus
| Stream variables | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Site | Mean depth (cm) | Mean velocity (m s−1) | Mean temp (°C) | Canopy open. (%) | Water chemistry | OM standing stock (g AFDM m−2) | Bottom substrate | Macroinvertebrates (0.25 m−2) | |||||||||
| pH | DOC (mg L−1) | DIN (µg L−1) | SRP (µg L−1) | Leaf | Needle | SWD | Moss | Div. (H′) | Median size (cm) | Organic fines (%) | Richness | Abundance | |||||
| B1 | 15.8 | 0.58 | 4.5 | 7.5 | 5.2 | 24.1 | 24.3 | 5.2 | 8.2 | 1.0 | 23.8 | 0 | 1.61 | 24.5 | 0 | 21 | 1689 |
| B3 | 15.9 | 0.45 | 6.7 | 15.8 | 5.2 | 24.6 | 11.0 | 6.0 | 10.2 | 0.8 | 1.6 | 51.0 | 1.81 | 10 | 2.4 | 19 | 326 |
| B4 | 8.9 | 0.36 | 6.9 | 83.3 | 4.7 | 34.8 | 151.0 | 11.0 | 3.2 | 0.4 | 2.2 | 0.2 | 1.82 | 34 | 0 | 15 | 2475 |
| G1 | 19.3 | 0.55 | 4.5 | 19.2 | 4.7 | 17.0 | 13.5 | 5.9 | 5.2 | 0.4 | 4.2 | 39.8 | 1.90 | 33.5 | 0 | 17 | 693 |
| G2 | 19.9 | 0.41 | 5.3 | 2.6 | 5.8 | 18.0 | 17.7 | 2.9 | 7.2 | 8.0 | 117.0 | 49.2 | 2.00 | 53 | 0 | 38 | 1921 |
| G3 | 19.7 | 0.09 | 5.1 | 8.8 | 6.1 | 9.8 | 11.8 | 5.3 | 2.8 | 5.0 | 107.4 | 3.6 | 1.77 | 1 | 59.5 | 15 | 105 |
| KB1 | 16.8 | 0.44 | 5.8 | 31.5 | 5.7 | 20.4 | 18.5 | 6.3 | 36.4 | 1.0 | 24.2 | 22.4 | 1.97 | 23.5 | 0 | 21 | 322 |
| KB8 | 16.7 | 0.40 | 5.7 | 9.3 | 5.3 | 21.2 | 19.8 | 2.7 | 54.2 | 0.8 | 34.4 | 73.4 | 1.82 | 1 | 51.3 | 20 | 976 |
| KR1 | 9.2 | 0.41 | 6.0 | 5.2 | 5.1 | 28.4 | 46.8 | 4.8 | 10.6 | 1.2 | 40.0 | 3.8 | 1.54 | 15 | 1 | 12 | 127 |
| KR6 | 13.8 | 0.40 | 6.8 | 5.7 | 5.2 | 20.5 | 31.3 | 4.6 | 5.6 | 2.2 | 21.4 | 0.6 | 1.41 | 7 | 0.5 | 16 | 634 |
| KR7 | 13.8 | 0.40 | 6.0 | 3.4 | 4.6 | 30.9 | 27.2 | 8.6 | 12.4 | 2.0 | 25.6 | 6.2 | 1.82 | 23 | 0 | 15 | 826 |
| R1 | 21.5 | 0.79 | 3.9 | 18.2 | 5.4 | 22.5 | 26.4 | 3.1 | 6.8 | 0.4 | 6.0 | 0.6 | 1.42 | 30 | 0 | 30 | 1145 |
| S2 | 9.6 | 0.36 | 7.1 | 5.3 | 4.4 | 42.4 | 24.2 | 9.5 | 6.6 | 0.8 | 57.8 | 4.4 | 1.33 | 7.5 | 0 | 13 | 2462 |
| S6 | 11.0 | 0.33 | 7.0 | 6.5 | 5.5 | 31.3 | 29.1 | 8.5 | 8.6 | 0.2 | 4.6 | 11.2 | 1.97 | 49 | 0.5 | 19 | 519 |
| S16 | 20.4 | 0.37 | 6.8 | 14.9 | 5.0 | 34.9 | 27.9 | 3.1 | 8.4 | 0.8 | 53.4 | 1.6 | 1.96 | 93 | 0.5 | 23 | 336 |
| S26 | 8.5 | 0.48 | 6.5 | 4.2 | 6.3 | 18.7 | 13.0 | 2.9 | 4.8 | 0.6 | 37.4 | 0.4 | 1.52 | 8 | 0 | 19 | 551 |
| V1 | 14.3 | 0.36 | 6.3 | 11.0 | 5.6 | 25.9 | 44.7 | 3.1 | 1.4 | 0.6 | 41.0 | 13.0 | 1.76 | 12 | 0 | 27 | 804 |
| V2 | 19.0 | 0.77 | 3.8 | 8.8 | 5.7 | 16.8 | 15.1 | 3.5 | 36.6 | 0.8 | 78.2 | 1.2 | 1.87 | 40.5 | 0 | 32 | 890 |
|
| 15.2 | 0.44 | 5.8 | 14.5 | 5.3 | 24.6 | 30.4 | 5.4 | 12.7 | 1.5 | 37.8 | 15.7 | 1.74 | 10 | 6.4 | 20.7 | 932.2 |
Results from partial least squares regression (PLS) analyses of catchment-scale characteristics as predictors of in-stream or macroinvertebrate variables. Numbers represent loadings (including direction of relationship) of predictor variables that obtained a VIP > 1.0 and cumulative amount of response variable variation explained by the first (C1) and second (C2) model component. SWD small woody debris, DOC dissolved organic carbon, SRP soluble reactive phosphorus, AFDM ash-free dry mass, PC principal component
| Response variables | Catchment-scale variables | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forest regeneration age class (%) | Land cover (%) | ||||||||
| 1–10 | 11–50 | 51–100 | 101–300 | Catchment size (ha) | Elevation (m a.s.l.) | Mire (%) | R2Y C1 |
| |
| In-stream variables | |||||||||
| Median substrate size (cm) | 0.867 | 0.455 | 0.45 | 0.48 | |||||
| Substrate diversity (H′) | 0.575 | 0.519 | 0.46 | 0.51 | |||||
| DOC (mg L−1) | −0.565 | −0.557 | 0.463 | 0.34 | 0.42 | ||||
| pH | 0.559 | −0.630 | 0.42 | 0.47 | |||||
| SRP (µg L−1) | 0.582 | −0.574 | −0.521 | 0.52 | 0.57 | ||||
| Needles (g AFDM m−2) | 0.840 | 0.500 | 0.60 | ||||||
| SWD (g AFDM m−2) | 0.403 | 0.803 | 0.26 | 0.31 | |||||
| Aquatic moss (g AFDM m−2) | 0.751 | 0.66 | 0.71 | ||||||
| Depth (cm) | 0.405 | 0.752 | 0.68 | 0.78 | |||||
| Water velocity (cm s−1) | 0.611 | −0.677 | 0.39 | 0.45 | |||||
| Macroinvertebrate variables | |||||||||
| PC 1 | 0.649 | −0.454 | 0.498 | 0.42 | 0.48 | ||||
| PC 2 | −0.422 | −0.545 | 0.646 | 0.57 | 0.61 | ||||
| Taxonomic richness | 0.604 | −0.461 | 0.641 | 0.63 | 0.69 | ||||
| Taxonomic diversity (H′) | 0.428 | −0.413 | 0.632 | 0.40 | 0.57 | ||||
| Trait diversity (H′) | 0.503 | 0.541 | −0.480 | 0.38 | 0.53 | ||||
| Simuliidae (%) | −0.456 | −0.533 | 0.504 | 0.31 | 0.48 | ||||
| Chironomidae (%) | 0.799 | −0.447 | 0.33 | 0.41 | |||||
| Low pH sensitivity (%) | −0.399 | 0.547 | 0.314 | 0.37 | 0.45 | ||||
Results from partial least squares regression (PLS) analyses of in-stream environmental conditions as predictors of macroinvertebrate variables. Numbers represent loadings (including direction of relationship) of predictor variables that obtained a VIP > 1.0 and cumulative amount of response variable variation explained by the first (C1) and second (C2) model component. SWD small woody debris, DOC dissolved organic carbon, SRP soluble reactive phosphorus, AFDM ash-free dry mass, PC principal component
| In-stream variables | Macroinvertebrate variables | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PC 1 | PC 2 | Taxonomic richness | Taxonomic diversity | Trait diversity | Simuliidae (%) | Chironomidae (%) | Low pH sensitivity (%) | |
| Median substrate size (cm) | 0.309 | |||||||
| Substrate diversity (H′) | −0.296 | |||||||
| DOC (mg L−1) | −0.379 | −0.427 | 0.387 | −0.479 | 0.284 | |||
| pH | 0.317 | 0.337 | 0.424 | 0.463 | −0.525 | 0.459 | −0.438 | |
| SRP (µg L−1) | −0.396 | −0.430 | −0.473 | −0.514 | 0.348 | 0.441 | ||
| Needle (g AFDM m−2) | 0.415 | 0.577 | 0.324 | |||||
| SWD (g AFDM m−2) | 0.370 | 0.285 | −0.317 | 0.405 | ||||
| Aquatic moss (g AFDM m−2) | 0.329 | |||||||
| Depth (cm) | 0.386 | 0.443 | 0.424 | 0.330 | −0.307 | |||
| Water velocity (cm s−1) | −0.438 | 0.385 | 0.322 | −0.314 | −0.607 | |||
| Canopy openness (%) | −0.368 | |||||||
| R2Y C1 | 0.56 | 0.56 | 0.61 | 0.57 | 0.58 | 0.48 | 0.56 | 0.49 |
| R2Y C2 | 0.78 | 0.65 | 0.75 | 0.70 | 0.73 | 0.65 | 0.82 | 0.65 |
Fig. 2Two-dimensional output (primary and secondary axes) from a canonical correspondence analysis, using the main variables explaining stream macroinvertebrate community composition (represented in principal component [PC] axes PC1 and PC2), the macroinvertebrate taxa, and sites. Predictor variables are canopy cover (% openness), velocity (water velocity, m s−1), pH, depth (cm), small woody debris (SWD; g AFDM m−2), needles (g AFDM m−2), moss (aquatic moss, g AFDM m−2), and soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP; µg L−1). Length of the vector associated with predictor variable indicates the relative strength of each relationship. Abbreviated taxon names are the first three letters of the genus and species names. Where visible (from top to bottom), Nem fle Nemoura flexuosa, Scl pen sor Scleroprocta pentagonalis/sororcula, Jun lon Jungiella longicornis, Sil pal Silo pallipes, Rhy var hea Rhyapholophus varius/haemorrhoidalis, Cap sch Capnopsis schilleri, Ber fre Berdeniella freyi, Bae rho Baetis rhodani, Pot sp Potamophylax sp., Hyd gra Hydraena gracilis, Cer sp Ceratopogoninae, Chi sp Chironomini sp., Rhy fas Rhyacophila fasciata, Bra ris Brachyptera risi, Leu cap Leuctra capnoposis, Leu dig hip Leuctra digitata/hippopus, Tan sp Tanytarsini sp., Rhy nub Rhyacophila nubila, Tae neb Taenypoteryx nebulosa, Nem sp Nemoura sp., Mic sp Micropterna sp., Rhy sp Rhyacophila sp., Iso sp Isoperla sp., Ple con Plectrocnemia conspersa, Nem pic Nemurella picteti, Aga gut Agabus guttatus, Diu nan Diuera nanseni, Cha vil Chaetopteryx villosa, Pro mey Protonemura meyeri, Nem nem Nemoura/Nemurella sp., Pol fla Polycentropus flavomaculatus, and Cru sp Crunobia sp
Fig. 3Summary of results from the separate partial least squares regression analyses on predictors of in-stream environmental conditions (Table 3) and predictors of macroinvertebrate variables (Table 4). Arrow thickness indicate loading size (i.e. level of importance), where a thin line represents < 0.50, medium thickness 0.5–0.79, and thick line >0.80. Red and blue indicate positive and negative relationships, respectively. As relationships between land use and response variables (black) differ among forest regeneration age classes, directions of relationships (see Tables 3, 4) are not given. Community composition entails macroinvertebrate PC1 and PC2 and %Simulidae and %Chironomidae, and both trait and taxonomic diversity are Shannon Wiener index (H′)