Hydrological‐niche models predict water plant functional group distributions in diverse wetland types

Deane, David C.; Nicol, Jason; Gehrig, Susan; Harding, Claire; Aldridge, Kane; Goodman, Abigail M.; Brookes, Justin D.

doi:10.1002/eap.1529

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In aquatic ecosystems, this role of freshwater is often referred to as "environmental flows" (Acreman et al, 2014;Poff et al, 2009;Poff & Matthews, 2013). In terrestrial systems, the quantity and timing of available water relative to a species' physiological requirements is assigned as "hydrologic niche" and, along with other environmental constraints, drives species composition and ecosystem function (Booth & Loheide, 2012;Deane et al, 2017;Henszey et al, 2004). Changes to the quantity and timing of water availability can impact biosphere integrity and make ecosystems more vulnerable to drought or flooding and/or enable the invasion of non-native species (Catford et al, 2014;Pool et al, 2010;Zipper et al, 2017).…”

Section: Hydroecological Regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Illuminating water cycle modifications and Earth system resilience in the Anthropocene

Gleeson

Wang‐Erlandsson

Porkka

et al. 2020

Water Resources Research

117

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fresh water-the bloodstream of the biosphere-is at the center of the planetary drama of the Anthropocene. Water fluxes and stores regulate the Earth's climate and are essential for thriving aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, as well as water, food, and energy security. But the water cycle is also being modified by humans at an unprecedented scale and rate. A holistic understanding of freshwater's role for Earth system resilience and the detection and monitoring of anthropogenic water cycle modifications across scales is urgent, yet existing methods and frameworks are not well suited for this. In this paper we highlight four core Earth system functions of water (hydroclimatic regulation, hydroecological regulation, storage, and transport) and key related processes. Building on systems and resilience theory, we review the evidence of regional-scale regime shifts and disruptions of the Earth system functions of water. We then propose a framework for detecting, monitoring, and establishing safe limits to water cycle modifications and identify four possible spatially explicit methods for their quantification. In sum, this paper presents an ambitious scientific and policy grand challenge that could substantially improve our understanding of the role of water in the Earth system and cross-scale management of water cycle modifications that would be a complementary approach to existing water management tools. Plain language summaryFreshwater is crucially important for all life on Earth. There is abundant research and evidence on how different processes within the water cycle regulate climate and support ecosystems, and by extension, human societies. Humans are also a major force disturbing those processes and modifying the water cycle. These modifications include, for instance, surface water withdrawals, groundwater pumping, deforestation and other land cover change, and ice melt due to warming climate. As most previous research on human-water interactions focuses on understanding systems at smaller scales, such as a watershed or a nation, comprehensive understanding of what human modifications of the water cycle mean for the stability of the planet is still lacking. In this paper we propose a new framework for analysing and establishing limits to a variety of human modifications of the water cycle,

show abstract

Section: Hydroecological Regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Illuminating water cycle modifications and Earth system resilience in the Anthropocene

Gleeson

Wang‐Erlandsson

Porkka

et al. 2020

Water Resources Research

117

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, vegetation composition at any particular time is determined by antecedent conditions (e.g. soil moisture or presence of water, flood pulse timing, rates of rise and recession; Greet et al 2011;Deane et al 2017;Moxham et al 2019), whereas the composition and structure of soil seed banks is typically shaped by flood histories over longer periods (e.g. frequency of inundation, time since last inundation ;Capon 2007;Brock 2011) and population structures of long-lived woody species will reflect even longer water regimes (e.g.…”

Section: Identify Relevant Temporal Dynamics Trajectories and Uncertaintiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Blue, green and in-between: objectives and approaches for evaluating wetland flow regimes based on vegetation outcomes

Campbell¹,

James

Morris

et al. 2021

Mar. Freshwater Res.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluating wetland vegetation responses to flow regimes is challenging because of the inherently complex, variable and dynamic nature of wetland vegetation in space and time. We propose four principles to guide the development of management objectives and evaluation approaches to support adaptive management of wetland vegetation in flowmanaged systems. First, we assert a need for more explicit, direct and defensible alignment of management objectives, targets and indicators to reflect broader ecological, sociocultural and economic values, and the underlying ecosystem functions that support them. Second, we propose a framework for indicator selection across multiple spatiotemporal scales and levels of ecological organisation, from individuals to landscape mosaics (vegscapes). Third, we emphasise the need to evaluate vegetation condition and responses to environmental flows in relation to a more nuanced understanding of temporal flow dynamics. Finally, we discuss the importance of considering the effects of non-flow variables that can modify vegetation responses to environmental flows. We highlight key knowledge needs required to support the implementation of these principles, particularly the urgency of improving our understanding of ecological, sociocultural and economic values of wetland vegetation and the attributes and functions that support these values.

show abstract

“…The organising role of flow on the abiotic and biotic characteristics of riparian and floodplain vegetation is well documented (Naiman and Décamps 1997). Many rivers, particularly those with large, wide floodplains, display distinct natural zonation of vegetation along a hydrological gradient associated with position in the landscape, from the banks of the river channel to the edge of the floodplain (Casanova and Brock 2000;Deane et al 2017;Jansson et al 2019). Habitats closest to the main channel are often characterised by high-velocity flows and long periods of inundation, and are dominated by species that tolerate these hydrological stressors, including true rheophytes (Bejarano et al 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterising the woody vegetation in contrasting habitat types in the lower Fitzroy River, Western Australia

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context. Riverine systems consist of distinct habitats along a landscape gradient and characterising the composition and structure of vegetation in these habitats can support environmental watermanagement decisions. However, in many regions, including northern Australia, there is a paucity of hydro-ecological data. Aims. We aimed to characterise the species composition and the structure of riparian and floodplain woody vegetation of the lower Fitzroy River. Methods. We surveyed woody vegetation in different habitats within the riparian zone and floodplain. Multivariate analysis was used to assess differences in the composition of riparian woody species among the four habitat types and univariate analysis was used to compare vegetation structure, recruitment, and environmental variables among habitats. Key results. The composition and the physical structure of woody species differed among habitat types of the lower Fitzroy River, indicating a zonation of riparian and floodplain vegetation in response to fluvial processes and water availability. The floodplain was characterised by sparsely distributed Eucalyptus microtheca and a sparse (~30%) canopy cover. In contrast, the riverbank habitat type had very large trees (mean basal area = 0.26 m 2 ), with a dense canopy cover (~80%) and was dominated by Melaleuca argentea, M. leucadendra and Barringtonia acutangula. Both the top of bank and off-channel wetlands represent a more intermediary environment, characterised by greater species richness and greater seedling recruitment. Conclusions. Identifying these habitat types and characterising their physical and biological properties, such as the relationship between flooding and the composition of woody species, provides a framework to assist the management of large floodplain river systems.

show abstract

Hydrological‐niche models predict water plant functional group distributions in diverse wetland types

Cited by 12 publications

References 47 publications

Illuminating water cycle modifications and Earth system resilience in the Anthropocene

Illuminating water cycle modifications and Earth system resilience in the Anthropocene

Blue, green and in-between: objectives and approaches for evaluating wetland flow regimes based on vegetation outcomes

Characterising the woody vegetation in contrasting habitat types in the lower Fitzroy River, Western Australia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About