TY - JOUR
T1 - How sensitive are invertebrates to riparian-zone replanting in stream ecosystems?
AU - Giling, Darren
AU - MAC NALLY, Ralph
AU - THOMPSON, Ross
PY - 2016/1/1
Y1 - 2016/1/1
N2 - Clearing native vegetation has pervasive effects on stream and river ecosystems worldwide. The stated aims
of replanting riparian vegetation often are to restore water quality and to re-establish biotic assemblages. However reachscale
restoration may do little to combat catchment-scale degradation, potentially inhibiting restoration success. Whether
reinstating biodiversity is a realistic goal or appropriate indicator of restoration success over intermediate timeframes
(,30 years) is currently unclear. We measured the response of aquatic macroinvertebrate assemblages to riparian
replanting in a chronosequence of replanted reaches on agricultural streams in south-eastern Australia. Sites had been
replanted with native vegetation 8¿22 years before the study. Indices of macroinvertebrate sensitivity did not respond to
replanting over the time gradient, probably because replanting had little benefit for local water quality or in-stream habitat.
The invertebrate assemblages were influenced mainly by catchment-scale effects and geomorphological characteristics,
but were closer to reference condition at sites with lower total catchment agricultural land cover. Reach-scale replanting in
heavily modified landscapes may not effectively return biodiversity to pre-clearance condition over decadal time-scales.
Restoration goals, and the spatial and temporal scale of processes required to meet them, should be carefully considered,
and monitoring methods explicitly matched to desired outcomes.
AB - Clearing native vegetation has pervasive effects on stream and river ecosystems worldwide. The stated aims
of replanting riparian vegetation often are to restore water quality and to re-establish biotic assemblages. However reachscale
restoration may do little to combat catchment-scale degradation, potentially inhibiting restoration success. Whether
reinstating biodiversity is a realistic goal or appropriate indicator of restoration success over intermediate timeframes
(,30 years) is currently unclear. We measured the response of aquatic macroinvertebrate assemblages to riparian
replanting in a chronosequence of replanted reaches on agricultural streams in south-eastern Australia. Sites had been
replanted with native vegetation 8¿22 years before the study. Indices of macroinvertebrate sensitivity did not respond to
replanting over the time gradient, probably because replanting had little benefit for local water quality or in-stream habitat.
The invertebrate assemblages were influenced mainly by catchment-scale effects and geomorphological characteristics,
but were closer to reference condition at sites with lower total catchment agricultural land cover. Reach-scale replanting in
heavily modified landscapes may not effectively return biodiversity to pre-clearance condition over decadal time-scales.
Restoration goals, and the spatial and temporal scale of processes required to meet them, should be carefully considered,
and monitoring methods explicitly matched to desired outcomes.
KW - agriculture
KW - biodiversity
KW - indicator
KW - restoration
KW - river
KW - spatial scale.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84988553402&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/sensitive-invertebrates-riparianzone-replanting-stream-ecosystems
U2 - 10.1071/MF14360
DO - 10.1071/MF14360
M3 - Article
SN - 1323-1650
VL - 67
SP - 1500
EP - 1511
JO - Marine and Freshwater Research
JF - Marine and Freshwater Research
IS - 10
ER -