TY - JOUR
T1 - Climate change and freshwater ecology: Hydrological and ecological methods of comparable complexity are needed to predict risk
AU - John, Andrew
AU - Horne, Avril
AU - Nathan, Rory
AU - Stewardson, Michael
AU - Webb, J. Angus
AU - Wang, Jun
AU - Poff, N. LeRoy
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was funded by the Australian Research Council (ARC Linkage Project LP170100598), Australian Commonwealth Government under a Research Training Program Scholarship, and several partner agencies including the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning; the Victorian Environmental Water Holder and the Bureau of Meteorology. Avril Horne was funded by Australian Research Council DECRA DE180100550.
Funding Information:
This study was funded by the Australian Research Council (ARC Linkage Project LP170100598), Australian Commonwealth Government under a Research Training Program Scholarship, and several partner agencies including the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning; the Victorian Environmental Water Holder and the Bureau of Meteorology. Avril Horne was funded by Australian Research Council DECRA DE180100550.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
PY - 2021/3/1
Y1 - 2021/3/1
N2 - Many freshwater ecosystems are in decline because of anthropogenic disturbance including climate change, yet our understanding of ecological vulnerability to future conditions including climatic variation is limited. Understanding climate risks to freshwater ecosystems requires combining hydrological and ecological knowledge. While there have been significant advances in ecohydrological approaches when applied within the large array of methods available for undertaking impact assessments, the ecological and hydrological elements are often not well-integrated. This results in a mismatch in their ability to accommodate the inherent uncertainty in both impacts and responses. We examine published literature that assesses climate change impacts on freshwater ecosystems using both hydrological and ecological models to better understand method choices. We identify four fundamentally distinct modeling approaches used to assess climate change risk. We discuss which approaches are less useful for predicting ecological impacts under climate change, and highlight approaches of comparable complexity that can maximize the utility of dynamic, process-based modeling while capturing the effects of climate uncertainty and variability. Using an illustrative case study of riparian vegetation health under climate change, we show how the four alternate modeling approaches feature different degrees of information in their outcomes and inferences about future risk. Most current studies that examine climate change risks to freshwater ecosystems use simplified methods or inadequately combine key elements. However, unless the interactions between changing hydrologic variability and ecological responses are explicitly captured in scale-sensitive modeling methods, the risks of climate change to freshwater ecosystems will likely be substantially misrepresented, with negative consequences for effective management responses. Capturing these interactions requires combining ecological and hydrological methods of comparable complexity.
AB - Many freshwater ecosystems are in decline because of anthropogenic disturbance including climate change, yet our understanding of ecological vulnerability to future conditions including climatic variation is limited. Understanding climate risks to freshwater ecosystems requires combining hydrological and ecological knowledge. While there have been significant advances in ecohydrological approaches when applied within the large array of methods available for undertaking impact assessments, the ecological and hydrological elements are often not well-integrated. This results in a mismatch in their ability to accommodate the inherent uncertainty in both impacts and responses. We examine published literature that assesses climate change impacts on freshwater ecosystems using both hydrological and ecological models to better understand method choices. We identify four fundamentally distinct modeling approaches used to assess climate change risk. We discuss which approaches are less useful for predicting ecological impacts under climate change, and highlight approaches of comparable complexity that can maximize the utility of dynamic, process-based modeling while capturing the effects of climate uncertainty and variability. Using an illustrative case study of riparian vegetation health under climate change, we show how the four alternate modeling approaches feature different degrees of information in their outcomes and inferences about future risk. Most current studies that examine climate change risks to freshwater ecosystems use simplified methods or inadequately combine key elements. However, unless the interactions between changing hydrologic variability and ecological responses are explicitly captured in scale-sensitive modeling methods, the risks of climate change to freshwater ecosystems will likely be substantially misrepresented, with negative consequences for effective management responses. Capturing these interactions requires combining ecological and hydrological methods of comparable complexity.
KW - climate change impact assessment
KW - ecohydrological modeling
KW - freshwater ecosystems
KW - interdisciplinary methods
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85096652361&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/wcc.692
DO - 10.1002/wcc.692
M3 - Review article
SN - 1757-7780
VL - 12
SP - 1
EP - 33
JO - Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change
JF - Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change
IS - 2
M1 - e692
ER -