Alterations to the natural flow regime affect the structure and function of rivers and wetlands and contribute to loss of biodiversity worldwide. Although the effects of flow regulation have been relatively well studied, a lack of synthesis of the ecological consequences of low flows and droughts impedes research progress and our grasp of the mechanistic effects of human-induced water reductions on riverine ecosystems. We identified 6 ecologically relevant hydrological attributes of low flow (antecedent conditions, duration, magnitude, timing and seasonality, rate of change, and frequency) that act within the temporal hierarchy of the flow regime and a spatial context. We synthesized the literature to propose 4 principles that outline the mechanistic links between these low-flow attributes and the processes and patterns within riverine ecosystems. First, low flows control the extent of physical aquatic habitat, thereby affecting the composition of biota, trophic structure, and carrying capacity. Second, low flows mediate changes in habitat conditions and water quality, which in turn, drive patterns of distribution and recruitment of biota. Third, low flows affect sources and exchange of material and energy in riverine ecosystems, thereby affecting ecosystem production and biotic composition. Last, low flows restrict connectivity and diversity of habitat, thereby increasing the importance of refugia and driving multiscale patterns in biotic diversity. These principles do not operate in isolation, and many of the ecological pathways that are affected by low flows are likely to overlap or occur simultaneously, potentially resulting in synergistic and complex effects. Last, we outlined major human-induced threats to low-flow hydrology and how they act upon the ecologically relevant hydrological attributes of low flow to affect potential changes in riverine ecosystem integrity. The mechanistic links described in this synthesis can be used to develop and test hypotheses of low-flow hydrological-ecological response relationships in a cause-effect framework that will have value for both research and river flow management. Continued experimental research and ongoing consolidation of ecological information will improve our understanding and ability to predict consequences of low-flow alteration on river, floodplain, and estuarine ecosystems.

Summary Rivers and streams that do not flow permanently (herein intermittent rivers; IRs) make up a large proportion of the world's inland waters and are gaining widespread attention. We review the research on IRs from its early focus on natural history through to current application in management and policy. The few early studies of the ecology of IRs were largely descriptive. Nevertheless, in the 1970s, synthesis of this sparse research complemented work on temporary standing waters to found a powerful framework for much of the subsequent research on IRs. Research on the ecology and biogeochemistry of IRs continues to fuel our understanding of resistance and resilience to drying and flooding as disturbances. Syntheses of the growing literature, including cross‐continental and cross‐climate comparisons, are revealing the generality and individuality of ecological and ecosystem responses to flow cessation and surface water loss. Meanwhile, increasing numbers of experiments test the causality of these responses. Much of the increased consideration of IRs in research, management and policy is driven by the observed and projected shifts in flow regimes from perennial to intermittent associated with changes in land and water use and climate, superimposed on the high incidence of natural intermittency. The need to protect and better manage IRs is prompting researchers to develop new or modified methods to monitor flow status and assess the ecological condition of these systems. Intermittent river research and management will benefit from greater exploration of aquatic–terrestrial linkages, wet–dry cycling and temporal dynamics, more‐detailed mapping and predictive modelling of flow intermittency and the application of metapopulation and metacommunity concepts alongside multiple‐stressors and novel‐ecosystems research. By building on existing knowledge, continuing to develop quantitative models and distribution maps and using experiments to test hypotheses and concepts, we can further ecological understanding and wise management of these ubiquitous ecosystems.

Determining and understanding relationships between biodiversity and hydrology is a critical goal in ecology, particularly given biodiversity in the freshwater realm is in crisis. Despite the prevalence of rivers experiencing natural drying disturbances (which we collectively refer to as intermittent rivers), and projections of increased frequency and duration of drying events, the importance of drying relative to other flow‐related determinants of river biodiversity remains understudied. We assessed the influence of drying on alpha‐ and beta‐diversity using discharge and macroinvertebrate data collated from Australia and southwest Europe over broad spatial and temporal scales, providing information on current and past drying events, and combining a wide variety of flow metrics. We found clear evidence that drying acts as a strong environmental filter and is a primary hydrological determinant of alpha‐diversity; even when considering both intermittent and perennial rivers, drying‐event conditions were its most important predictors. Macroinvertebrate richness declined with increasing durations of drying over the long‐term (Australia) and recent (Australia and southwest Europe) history of river discharge, and with decreasing predictability of event timing (Australia). Our analysis also revealed that: responses can be taxon specific due to variation in traits of resistance and resilience to drying; some taxa may respond just as or more strongly to variation in other discharge components (e.g. high‐ or low‐flow events) than to drying; and together these phenomena may result in differing community‐level responses within and across regions. Patterns of beta‐diversity across the wide biogeographical range of our study suggested that convergent and divergent niche‐selection processes may act in combination on aquatic communities of rivers experiencing drying disturbances. However, strong ability to disperse by flight (not by water) weakened beta‐diversity patterning among rivers. Our findings can be used to improve understanding of biodiversity organisation in disturbed systems, notably in those with dendritic features, including intermittent rivers.

Perennial rivers and streams make a disproportionate contribution to global carbon (C)cycling. However, the contribution of intermittent rivers and ephemeral streams, which

Summary Intermittent rivers are increasingly viewed as shifting mosaics of lotic (flowing water), lentic (standing water) and terrestrial (dry riverbed) habitats. The diversity, spatial arrangement, temporal turnover and connectivity of these habitats are controlled by the magnitude, frequency, duration and extent of drying and rewetting events, which maintain habitat heterogeneity and control biodiversity and biogeochemical processes in intermittent rivers. We consider intermittent rivers as spatiotemporal landscape mosaics to identify the implications such a view has for empirical and theoretical developments in landscape and river ecology. Using observational data of flow states collected by citizen scientists along 1400 km of river channels in western France, we used landscape metrics and ecologically scaled indices for four hypothetical, aquatic species (two fish and two insects) to describe the dynamics of intermittent river mosaics for five catchments. Dry patches dominated most observation dates but flowing patches had the longest average length and occupied the greatest proportion of channel length. At the start of each summer, catchments were almost entirely composed of flowing patches but lentic and dry patches could represented up to 80% of the catchments as summer progressed. Patch dynamics were typified by high levels of spatiotemporal variability. In contrast, ecologically scaled indices did not vary greatly among catchments within species. The ecologically scaled indices representing small fish were the most affected by habitat fragmentation. Such a landscape perspective could affect understanding of biodiversity patterns and biogeochemical processes in intermittent rivers. We outline the methodological developments required to integrate landscape approaches into intermittent river research, the associated challenges and current limitations in landscape ecology tools and models and the benefits of citizen science data sets. The continued quantification of shifting habitat mosaics in intermittent rivers will provide multiple opportunities to advance river and landscape ecology.

This can be applied at all flow phases and in assessing impacts of altered flow intermittence on rivers and their ecosystem services in the Anthropocene.

Resilience in river ecosystems requires that organisms must persist in the face of highly dynamic hydrological and geomorphological variations. Disturbance events such as floods and droughts are postulated to shape life history traits that support resilience, but river management and conservation would benefit from greater understanding of the emergent effects in communities of river organisms. We unify current knowledge of taxonomic‐, phylogenetic‐, and trait‐based aspects of river communities that might aid the identification and quantification of resilience mechanisms. Temporal variations in river productivity, physical connectivity, and environmental heterogeneity resulting from floods and droughts are highlighted as key characteristics that promote resilience in these dynamic ecosystems. Three community‐wide mechanisms that underlie resilience are (a) partitioning (competition/facilitation) of dynamically varying resources, (b) dispersal, recolonization, and recruitment promoted by connectivity, and (c) functional redundancy in communities promoted by resource heterogeneity and refugia. Along with taxonomic and phylogenetic identity, biological traits related to feeding specialization, dispersal ability, and habitat specialization mediate organism responses to disturbance. Measures of these factors might also enable assessment of the relative contributions of different mechanisms to community resilience. Interactions between abiotic drivers and biotic aspects of resource use, dispersal, and persistence have clear implications for river conservation and management. To support these management needs, we propose a set of taxonomic, phylogenetic, and life‐history trait metrics that might be used to measure resilience mechanisms. By identifying such indicators, our proposed framework can enable targeted management strategies to adapt river ecosystems to global change.

No abstract