Cargando…

Resolving large‐scale pressures on species and ecosystems: propensity modelling identifies agricultural effects on streams

1. Although agriculture is amongst the world's most widespread land uses, studies of its effects on stream ecosystems are often limited in spatial extent. National monitoring data could extend spatial coverage and increase statistical power, but present analytical challenges where covarying env...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pearson, Caitlin E., Ormerod, Steve J., Symondson, William O.C., Vaughan, Ian P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5102586/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27867215
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12586
_version_ 1782466449092116480
author Pearson, Caitlin E.
Ormerod, Steve J.
Symondson, William O.C.
Vaughan, Ian P.
author_facet Pearson, Caitlin E.
Ormerod, Steve J.
Symondson, William O.C.
Vaughan, Ian P.
author_sort Pearson, Caitlin E.
collection PubMed
description 1. Although agriculture is amongst the world's most widespread land uses, studies of its effects on stream ecosystems are often limited in spatial extent. National monitoring data could extend spatial coverage and increase statistical power, but present analytical challenges where covarying environmental variables confound relationships of interest. 2. Propensity modelling is used widely outside ecology to control for confounding variables in observational data. Here, monitoring data from over 3000 English and Welsh river reaches are used to assess the effects of intensive agricultural land cover (arable and pastoral) on stream habitat, water chemistry and invertebrates, using propensity scores to control for potential confounding factors (e.g. climate, geology). Propensity scoring effectively reduced the collinearity between land cover and potential confounding variables, reducing the potential for covariate bias in estimated treatment–response relationships compared to conventional multiple regression. 3. Macroinvertebrate richness was significantly greater at sites with a higher proportion of improved pasture in their catchment or riparian zone, with these effects probably mediated by increased algal production from mild nutrient enrichment. In contrast, macroinvertebrate richness did not change with arable land cover, although sensitive species representation was lower under higher proportions of arable land cover, probably due to greatly elevated nutrient concentrations. 4. Synthesis and applications. Propensity modelling has great potential to address questions about pressures on ecosystems and organisms at the large spatial extents relevant to land‐use policy, where experimental approaches are not feasible and broad environmental changes often covary. Applied to the effects of agricultural land cover on stream systems, this approach identified reduced nutrient loading from arable farms as a priority for land management. On this specific issue, our data and analysis support the use of riparian or catchment‐scale measures to reduce nutrient delivery to sensitive water bodies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5102586
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51025862016-11-16 Resolving large‐scale pressures on species and ecosystems: propensity modelling identifies agricultural effects on streams Pearson, Caitlin E. Ormerod, Steve J. Symondson, William O.C. Vaughan, Ian P. J Appl Ecol Landscape Management 1. Although agriculture is amongst the world's most widespread land uses, studies of its effects on stream ecosystems are often limited in spatial extent. National monitoring data could extend spatial coverage and increase statistical power, but present analytical challenges where covarying environmental variables confound relationships of interest. 2. Propensity modelling is used widely outside ecology to control for confounding variables in observational data. Here, monitoring data from over 3000 English and Welsh river reaches are used to assess the effects of intensive agricultural land cover (arable and pastoral) on stream habitat, water chemistry and invertebrates, using propensity scores to control for potential confounding factors (e.g. climate, geology). Propensity scoring effectively reduced the collinearity between land cover and potential confounding variables, reducing the potential for covariate bias in estimated treatment–response relationships compared to conventional multiple regression. 3. Macroinvertebrate richness was significantly greater at sites with a higher proportion of improved pasture in their catchment or riparian zone, with these effects probably mediated by increased algal production from mild nutrient enrichment. In contrast, macroinvertebrate richness did not change with arable land cover, although sensitive species representation was lower under higher proportions of arable land cover, probably due to greatly elevated nutrient concentrations. 4. Synthesis and applications. Propensity modelling has great potential to address questions about pressures on ecosystems and organisms at the large spatial extents relevant to land‐use policy, where experimental approaches are not feasible and broad environmental changes often covary. Applied to the effects of agricultural land cover on stream systems, this approach identified reduced nutrient loading from arable farms as a priority for land management. On this specific issue, our data and analysis support the use of riparian or catchment‐scale measures to reduce nutrient delivery to sensitive water bodies. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-04 2016-01-18 /pmc/articles/PMC5102586/ /pubmed/27867215 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12586 Text en © 2015 The Authors. Journal of Applied Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Landscape Management
Pearson, Caitlin E.
Ormerod, Steve J.
Symondson, William O.C.
Vaughan, Ian P.
Resolving large‐scale pressures on species and ecosystems: propensity modelling identifies agricultural effects on streams
title Resolving large‐scale pressures on species and ecosystems: propensity modelling identifies agricultural effects on streams
title_full Resolving large‐scale pressures on species and ecosystems: propensity modelling identifies agricultural effects on streams
title_fullStr Resolving large‐scale pressures on species and ecosystems: propensity modelling identifies agricultural effects on streams
title_full_unstemmed Resolving large‐scale pressures on species and ecosystems: propensity modelling identifies agricultural effects on streams
title_short Resolving large‐scale pressures on species and ecosystems: propensity modelling identifies agricultural effects on streams
title_sort resolving large‐scale pressures on species and ecosystems: propensity modelling identifies agricultural effects on streams
topic Landscape Management
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5102586/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27867215
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12586
work_keys_str_mv AT pearsoncaitline resolvinglargescalepressuresonspeciesandecosystemspropensitymodellingidentifiesagriculturaleffectsonstreams
AT ormerodstevej resolvinglargescalepressuresonspeciesandecosystemspropensitymodellingidentifiesagriculturaleffectsonstreams
AT symondsonwilliamoc resolvinglargescalepressuresonspeciesandecosystemspropensitymodellingidentifiesagriculturaleffectsonstreams
AT vaughanianp resolvinglargescalepressuresonspeciesandecosystemspropensitymodellingidentifiesagriculturaleffectsonstreams