| Literature DB >> 32541802 |
Sebastian Birk1,2, Daniel Chapman3,4, Laurence Carvalho3, Bryan M Spears3, Hans Estrup Andersen5, Christine Argillier6, Stefan Auer7, Annette Baattrup-Pedersen5, Lindsay Banin3, Meryem Beklioğlu8, Elisabeth Bondar-Kunze7, Angel Borja9, Paulo Branco10, Tuba Bucak8,11, Anthonie D Buijse12, Ana Cristina Cardoso13, Raoul-Marie Couture14,15, Fabien Cremona16, Dick de Zwart17, Christian K Feld18,19, M Teresa Ferreira10, Heidrun Feuchtmayr20, Mark O Gessner21,22, Alexander Gieswein18, Lidija Globevnik23, Daniel Graeber5,24, Wolfram Graf25, Cayetano Gutiérrez-Cánovas26,27, Jenica Hanganu28, Uğur Işkın8, Marko Järvinen29, Erik Jeppesen5, Niina Kotamäki29, Marijn Kuijper12, Jan U Lemm18, Shenglan Lu30, Anne Lyche Solheim14, Ute Mischke31, S Jannicke Moe14, Peeter Nõges16, Tiina Nõges16, Steve J Ormerod26, Yiannis Panagopoulos32,33, Geoff Phillips4, Leo Posthuma34,35, Sarai Pouso9, Christel Prudhomme3, Katri Rankinen36, Jes J Rasmussen5, Jessica Richardson3, Alban Sagouis6,31,37, José Maria Santos10, Ralf B Schäfer38, Rafaela Schinegger25, Stefan Schmutz25, Susanne C Schneider14, Lisa Schülting25, Pedro Segurado10, Kostas Stefanidis32,33, Bernd Sures18,19, Stephen J Thackeray20, Jarno Turunen39, María C Uyarra9, Markus Venohr31, Peter Carsten von der Ohe40, Nigel Willby4, Daniel Hering18,19.
Abstract
Climate and land-use change drive a suite of stressors that shape ecosystems and interact to yield complex ecological responses (that is, additive, antagonistic and synergistic effects). We know little about the spatial scales relevant for the outcomes of such interactions and little about effect sizes. These knowledge gaps need to be filled to underpin future land management decisions or climate mitigation interventions for protecting and restoring freshwater ecosystems. This study combines data across scales from 33 mesocosm experiments with those from 14 river basins and 22 cross-basin studies in Europe, producing 174 combinations of paired-stressor effects on a biological response variable. Generalized linear models showed that only one of the two stressors had a significant effect in 39% of the analysed cases, 28% of the paired-stressor combinations resulted in additive effects and 33% resulted in interactive (antagonistic, synergistic, opposing or reversal) effects. For lakes, the frequencies of additive and interactive effects were similar for all spatial scales addressed, while for rivers these frequencies increased with scale. Nutrient enrichment was the overriding stressor for lakes, with effects generally exceeding those of secondary stressors. For rivers, the effects of nutrient enrichment were dependent on the specific stressor combination and biological response variable. These results vindicate the traditional focus of lake restoration and management on nutrient stress, while highlighting that river management requires more bespoke management solutions.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32541802 DOI: 10.1038/s41559-020-1216-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Ecol Evol ISSN: 2397-334X Impact factor: 15.460