Multiple watershed alterations influence fish community structure in Great Plains prairie streams

Abstract

Stream fish distributions are commonly linked to environmental disturbances affecting terrestrial landscapes. In Great Plains prairie streams, the independent and interactive effects of watershed impoundments and land cover changes remain poorly understood despite their prevalence and assumed contribution to declining stream fish diversity. We used structural equation models and fish community samples from third‐order streams in the Kansas River and Arkansas River basins of Kansas, USA to test the simultaneous effects of geographic location, terrestrial landscape alteration, watershed impoundments and local habitat on species richness for stream‐associated and impoundment‐associated habitat guilds. Watershed impoundment density increased from west to east in both basins, while per cent altered terrestrial landscape (urbanisation + row‐crop agriculture) averaged ~50% in the west, declined throughout the Flint Hills ecoregion and increased (Kansas River basin ~80%) or decreased (Arkansas River basin ~30%) to the east. Geographic location had the strongest effect on richness for both guilds across basins, supporting known zoogeography patterns. In addition to location, impoundment species richness was positively correlated with local habitat in both basins; whereas stream‐species richness was negatively correlated with landscape alterations (Kansas River basin) or landscape alterations and watershed impoundments (Arkansas River basin). These findings suggest that convergences in the relative proportions of impoundment and stream species (i.e., community structure) in the eastern extent of both basins are related to positive effects of increased habitat opportunities for impoundment species and negative effects caused by landscape alterations (Kansas River basin) or landscape alterations plus watershed impoundments (Arkansas River basin) for stream species.

Temporal and spatial dynamics of fish community structure during watershed alteration in two Ouachita River systems

“…Relative to other studies that have documented temporal changes in fish community structure due to human disturbance(Geheber & Piller, 2012;Gido et al, 2010;Morgan & Cushman, 2005;Perkin et al, 2014), our study area has been less altered and demonstrates moderate landscape-scale disturbances can have negative effects on stream fish communities after several decades. Fish community composition shifted in the Saline River basin across three time periods possibly in response similar combinations of functional traits through time.In the Ouachita Headwaters basin, there was no shift in fish community composition in multivariate space, but taxonomic dissimilarity decreased, whereas functional dissimilarity did not change as evidenced by homogeneity of group dispersions.…”

“…The response of fish communities to landscape alterations is highly variable due to the covariation of natural and anthropogenic gradients, multi-scale mechanisms, nonlinear responses and land use legacies (Allan, 2004). Utilisation of historical datasets with adequate spatial extent is critical to assess temporal shifts in fish community composition (Geheber & Piller, 2012;Gido et al, 2010), especially after watershed alteration (Morgan & Cushman, 2005;Perkin et al, 2014) that can result in gradual or abrupt changes (Gido et al, 2010;Matthews, Marsh-Matthews, Cashner, & Gelwick, 2013).…”

If you build it, they will go: A case study of stream fish diversity loss in an urbanizing riverscape

“…At the other end of the land‐use gradient, southern redbelly dace ( Chrosomus erythrogaster (Rafinesque, 1820)) and blacknose dace ( Rhinichthys atratulus (Hermann, 1804)) were most abundant at the site with the greatest fish diversity across all time periods and the lowest level of urban development. Both of these species have shown sensitivity to urban land development in other regions (Fraker, Snodgrass, & Morgan, ; Long & Schorr, ; Perkin et al, ). From this case study it is clear that broad‐scale and catchment‐wide assessments of assemblage change do not capture finer‐scale or spatially structured changes, and multi‐scale investigations stand a better chance of identifying the most appropriate spatial scales for assessing assemblage and species status (Fausch et al, ).…”

“…Results (see below) suggested that H differed through time, and thus H patterns were plotted for 1976 and 2016. Diversity change maps were overlain onto maps of land development change because terrestrial land development is an agent of change for fish assemblages, including contributing to the loss of fish diversity (Perkin, Troia, Shaw, Gerken, & Gido, ; Wang et al, ). Historical land use for the years 1974 and 2012 were acquired from Falcone ().…”

Hierarchy theory reveals multiscale predictors of Arkansas darter (Etheostoma cragini) abundance in a Great Plains riverscape

“…Habitat dimension can be measured as stream width (m) and depth (m), whereas heterogeneity involves structures such as aquatic vegetation, canopy cover, and instream woody structure. Each of these components of habitat is regulated by hydrologic processes that link streams to terrestrial landscapes (Burcher, Valett, & Benfield, 2007;Perkin, Troia, Shaw, Gerken, & Gido, 2016). For example, terrestrial habitat transformation has disrupted historic vegetative succession regimes and allowed for woody encroachment across basins (Briggs et al, 2005), and this affects stream reaches and segments by stabilising banks, increasing stream depths, closing otherwise open canopies, and depositing instream woody structure (Fischer et al, 2010;Poff et al, 1997).…”