Integrated constructed wetlands: hotspots for freshwater coleopteran diversity in the landscape of Ireland

Becerra-Jurado,; Föster,; Harrington,; Kelly‐Quinn, Mary

doi:10.3318/bioe.2014.29

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study is consistent with findings from other authors in showing that in situ conservation and water quality benefits accrue from ICW construction (Doody et al 2009;Harrington and McInnes 2009;Dong et al 2011;Becerra-Jurado et al 2014). The relatively low costs of the ICW reported here meant that the ICW was a more viable method for P removal at a small rural STW than, for instance, tertiary treatment by dosing secondarily treated effluent with metal salts to remove P by precipitation which can be expensive (Morse et al 1998).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Becerra Jurado et al (2010) demonstrated that an ICW can support the same macroinvertebrate diversity of taxa as natural ponds. In a further study on Coleoptera, Becerra-Jurado et al (2014) demonstrated that the various cells of an ICW supported 82 water beetle taxa, which represents 26% of the known Irish aquatic lentic coleopteran fauna and included several species of conservation concern including the 'endangered' species Agabus conspersus and Berosus signaticollis. When compared to artificial wetlands, natural wetlands support a greater abundance and diversity of birds (Ma et al 2004;Brooks et al 2005;Hsu et al 2011), but artificial and managed wetlands can still offer an important habitat for a range of bird species (Sebastián-González et al 2010;Lewis-Phillips et al 2019) providing refuge, food and breeding sites (Sebastián-González et al 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Can an Integrated Constructed Wetland in Norfolk Reduce Nutrient Concentrations and Promote In Situ Bird Species Richness?

Biervliet

McInnes²,

Lewis-Phillips

et al. 2020

Wetlands

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integrated Constructed Wetlands (ICWs) are potentially effective tools in the effort to restore aquatic ecosystems, and also they incorporate multiple co-benefits. An ICW was constructed in Norfolk, UK, to address the degradation of a stream and lake receiving treated effluent from a small Sewage Treatment Works (STW). Results demonstrated that: (1) nutrient concentrations significantly reduced from the ICW influent to the effluent (percentage reductions: total phosphorus [TP]: 78%, orthophosphate: 80%, total oxidised nitrogen [TON]: 65%, nitrate: 65%, nitrite: 67%, ammoniacal nitrogen: 62%), and mean dissolved oxygen concentrations increased (influent mean: 6.4 ± 1.4 mg l −1 effluent mean: 17.8 ± 3.3 mg l −1 ), (2) there were non-significant reductions in nutrient concentrations in the receiving stream (percentage reductions: TP: 23%, orthophosphate: 23%, TON: 26%, nitrate: 26%), with the exception of ammoniacal nitrogen (127% increase) and nitrite (76%) after ICW commissioning, and (3) mean in situ avian species richness increased from 10 to 27 species. Thus, the ICW substantially reduced nutrient concentrations, and had in situ conservation benefits. It is recommended that appropriately designed ICWs should be implemented widely and statutory authorities should ensure: 1) best-practice maintenance and 2) final effluent monitoring at both the STW and at the ICW outflows.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can an Integrated Constructed Wetland in Norfolk Reduce Nutrient Concentrations and Promote In Situ Bird Species Richness?

Biervliet

McInnes²,

Lewis-Phillips

et al. 2020

Wetlands

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Capital, energy and maintenance costs are generally much lower for GI than traditional grey infrastructure in stormwater management (Center for Clean Air Policy 2011). Fenner (2017) recommends a proactive approach to multiple benefits through co-design of GI/Suds features to maximise variety of water depths and vegetation, tree-planting, use of floating islands, and also increasing the overall ICW area and number of ponds (Becerra-Jurado et al 2014;Becerra-Jurado et al 2012). Harrington and McInnes (2009) summarised the range of ecosystem services provided by the Anne Valley ICWs.…”

Section: Co-benefits Challenges and Potentialmentioning

confidence: 99%

An evaluation of the potential applications of nature-based solutions for water quality protection: Ireland as a case study

Heneghan¹,

Collier²,

Kelly‐Quinn³

2021

Biology and Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nature-based solutions (NBS) approach views nature and natural processes as having a high potential to address societal challenges and sustainable development goals, whilst providing multiple co-benefits. It is an approach that offers a mechanism for mainstreaming climate-related issues into practice and policy. Concurrently, EU member states are struggling to comply with the objectives of the Water Framework Directive (WFD). This paper evaluates the application of NBS in addressing water-quality issues in the EU, using Ireland as a case study through a systematic review of the literature. This study found that there are many anecdotal examples of NBS in Ireland, although they are rarely identified as such in publications and official documents. However, a database was compiled of NBS identified during a systematic review of the literature. Existing research indicates the selected NBS of constructed wetlands (CWs), sustainable drainage systems (Suds) and NBS in the riparian zone can improve water quality, to varying degrees. Limited Irish-based research was available for Suds and NBS in the riparian zone. Reported co-benefits include cost-savings, enhanced biodiversity and ecosystem services such as carbon sequestration and recreation. The potential for further implementation of the selected NBS in Ireland is significant.

show abstract

“…In 2012, Walton [135] (173) made the following observation for constructed wetlands including open water: "Design features, maintenance activities and the characteristics of the wastewater undergoing treatment contribute differentially to potential levels of mosquito production and, consequently, to threats to human and animal health from mosquito-borne pathogens". The management of constructed wetlands and, in particular, vegetation and the presence of fish also have major effects on the diversity of water beetles [136,137]. The colonization of constructed wetlands by shore flies (Diptera: Ephydridae) depends on the growth and maturity of aquatic vegetation.…”

Section: Impacts Of Constructed Wetlands On Biodiversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Biodiversity Impact of Green Roofs and Constructed Wetlands as Progressive Eco-Technologies in Urban Areas

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The total amount of sealed surfaces is increasing in many urban areas, which presents a challenge for sewerage systems and wastewater treatment plants when extreme rainfall events occur. One promising solution approach is the application of decentralized eco-technologies for water management such as green roofs and constructed wetlands, which also have the potential to improve urban biodiversity. We review the effects of these two eco-technologies on species richness, abundance and other facets of biodiversity (e.g., functional diversity). We find that while green roofs support fewer species than ground-level habitats and thus are not a substitute for the latter, the increase in green roof structural diversity supports species richness. Species abundance benefits from improved roof conditions (e.g., increased substrate depth). Few studies have investigated the functional diversity of green roofs so far, but the typical traits of green roof species have been identified. The biodiversity of animals in constructed wetlands can be improved by applying animal-aided design rather than by solely considering engineering requirements. For example, flat and barrier-free shore areas, diverse vegetation, and heterogeneous surroundings increase the attractiveness of constructed wetlands for a range of animals. We suggest that by combining and making increasing use of these two eco-technologies in urban areas, biodiversity will benefit.

show abstract

Integrated constructed wetlands: hotspots for freshwater coleopteran diversity in the landscape of Ireland

Cited by 6 publications

References 10 publications

Can an Integrated Constructed Wetland in Norfolk Reduce Nutrient Concentrations and Promote In Situ Bird Species Richness?

Can an Integrated Constructed Wetland in Norfolk Reduce Nutrient Concentrations and Promote In Situ Bird Species Richness?

An evaluation of the potential applications of nature-based solutions for water quality protection: Ireland as a case study

Biodiversity Impact of Green Roofs and Constructed Wetlands as Progressive Eco-Technologies in Urban Areas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About