Cargando…

Ecological relevance of non‐perennial rivers for the conservation of terrestrial and aquatic communities

River conservation efforts traditionally focus on perennial watercourses (i.e., those that do not dry) and their associated aquatic biodiversity. However, most of the global river network is not perennial and thus supports both aquatic and terrestrial biodiversity. We assessed the conservation value...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bruno, Daniel, Hermoso, Virgilio, Sánchez‐Montoya, María Mar, Belmar, Oscar, Gutiérrez‐Cánovas, Cayetano, Cañedo‐Argüelles, Miguel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10092893/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35946319
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13982
_version_ 1785023454658953216
author Bruno, Daniel
Hermoso, Virgilio
Sánchez‐Montoya, María Mar
Belmar, Oscar
Gutiérrez‐Cánovas, Cayetano
Cañedo‐Argüelles, Miguel
author_facet Bruno, Daniel
Hermoso, Virgilio
Sánchez‐Montoya, María Mar
Belmar, Oscar
Gutiérrez‐Cánovas, Cayetano
Cañedo‐Argüelles, Miguel
author_sort Bruno, Daniel
collection PubMed
description River conservation efforts traditionally focus on perennial watercourses (i.e., those that do not dry) and their associated aquatic biodiversity. However, most of the global river network is not perennial and thus supports both aquatic and terrestrial biodiversity. We assessed the conservation value of nonperennial rivers and streams (NPRS) in one of Europe's driest regions based on aquatic (macroinvertebrates, diatoms) and terrestrial (riparian plants, birds, and carabid beetles) community data. We mapped the distribution of taxa at 90 locations and across wide environmental gradients. Using the systematic planning tool Marxan, we identified priority conservation sites under 2 scenarios: aquatic taxa alone or aquatic and terrestrial taxa together. We explored how environmental factors (runoff, flow intermittence, elevation, salinity, anthropogenic impact) influenced Marxan's site selection frequency. The NPRS were selected more frequently (over 13% on average) than perennial rivers when both aquatic and terrestrial taxa were considered, suggesting that NPRS have a high conservation value at the catchment scale. We detected an underrepresentation of terrestrial taxa (8.4–10.6% terrestrial vs. 0.5–1.1% aquatic taxa were unrepresented in most Marxan solutions) when priority sites were identified based exclusively on aquatic biodiversity, which points to a low surrogacy value of aquatic taxa for terrestrial taxa. Runoff explained site selection when focusing on aquatic taxa (all best‐fitting models included runoff, r (2) = 0.26–0.27), whereas elevation, salinity, and flow intermittence were more important when considering both groups. In both cases, site selection frequency declined as anthropogenic impact increased. Our results highlight the need to integrate terrestrial and aquatic communities when identifying priority areas for conservation in catchments with NPRS. This is key to overcoming drawbacks of traditional assessments based only on aquatic taxa and to ensure the conservation of NPRS, especially as NPRS become more prevalent worldwide due to climate change and increasing water demands.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10092893
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100928932023-04-13 Ecological relevance of non‐perennial rivers for the conservation of terrestrial and aquatic communities Bruno, Daniel Hermoso, Virgilio Sánchez‐Montoya, María Mar Belmar, Oscar Gutiérrez‐Cánovas, Cayetano Cañedo‐Argüelles, Miguel Conserv Biol Contributed Papers River conservation efforts traditionally focus on perennial watercourses (i.e., those that do not dry) and their associated aquatic biodiversity. However, most of the global river network is not perennial and thus supports both aquatic and terrestrial biodiversity. We assessed the conservation value of nonperennial rivers and streams (NPRS) in one of Europe's driest regions based on aquatic (macroinvertebrates, diatoms) and terrestrial (riparian plants, birds, and carabid beetles) community data. We mapped the distribution of taxa at 90 locations and across wide environmental gradients. Using the systematic planning tool Marxan, we identified priority conservation sites under 2 scenarios: aquatic taxa alone or aquatic and terrestrial taxa together. We explored how environmental factors (runoff, flow intermittence, elevation, salinity, anthropogenic impact) influenced Marxan's site selection frequency. The NPRS were selected more frequently (over 13% on average) than perennial rivers when both aquatic and terrestrial taxa were considered, suggesting that NPRS have a high conservation value at the catchment scale. We detected an underrepresentation of terrestrial taxa (8.4–10.6% terrestrial vs. 0.5–1.1% aquatic taxa were unrepresented in most Marxan solutions) when priority sites were identified based exclusively on aquatic biodiversity, which points to a low surrogacy value of aquatic taxa for terrestrial taxa. Runoff explained site selection when focusing on aquatic taxa (all best‐fitting models included runoff, r (2) = 0.26–0.27), whereas elevation, salinity, and flow intermittence were more important when considering both groups. In both cases, site selection frequency declined as anthropogenic impact increased. Our results highlight the need to integrate terrestrial and aquatic communities when identifying priority areas for conservation in catchments with NPRS. This is key to overcoming drawbacks of traditional assessments based only on aquatic taxa and to ensure the conservation of NPRS, especially as NPRS become more prevalent worldwide due to climate change and increasing water demands. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-10-11 2022-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10092893/ /pubmed/35946319 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13982 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Contributed Papers
Bruno, Daniel
Hermoso, Virgilio
Sánchez‐Montoya, María Mar
Belmar, Oscar
Gutiérrez‐Cánovas, Cayetano
Cañedo‐Argüelles, Miguel
Ecological relevance of non‐perennial rivers for the conservation of terrestrial and aquatic communities
title Ecological relevance of non‐perennial rivers for the conservation of terrestrial and aquatic communities
title_full Ecological relevance of non‐perennial rivers for the conservation of terrestrial and aquatic communities
title_fullStr Ecological relevance of non‐perennial rivers for the conservation of terrestrial and aquatic communities
title_full_unstemmed Ecological relevance of non‐perennial rivers for the conservation of terrestrial and aquatic communities
title_short Ecological relevance of non‐perennial rivers for the conservation of terrestrial and aquatic communities
title_sort ecological relevance of non‐perennial rivers for the conservation of terrestrial and aquatic communities
topic Contributed Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10092893/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35946319
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13982
work_keys_str_mv AT brunodaniel ecologicalrelevanceofnonperennialriversfortheconservationofterrestrialandaquaticcommunities
AT hermosovirgilio ecologicalrelevanceofnonperennialriversfortheconservationofterrestrialandaquaticcommunities
AT sanchezmontoyamariamar ecologicalrelevanceofnonperennialriversfortheconservationofterrestrialandaquaticcommunities
AT belmaroscar ecologicalrelevanceofnonperennialriversfortheconservationofterrestrialandaquaticcommunities
AT gutierrezcanovascayetano ecologicalrelevanceofnonperennialriversfortheconservationofterrestrialandaquaticcommunities
AT canedoarguellesmiguel ecologicalrelevanceofnonperennialriversfortheconservationofterrestrialandaquaticcommunities