Sediments and flow have mainly independent effects on multitrophic stream communities and ecosystem functions

Mustonen, Kaisa‐Riikka; Mykrä, Heikki; Louhi, Pauliina; Markkola, Annamari; Tolkkinen, Mikko; Huusko, Ari; Alioravainen, Nico; Lehtinen, Sirkku; Muotka, Timo

doi:10.1890/15-1841.1

Cited by 28 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Increased concentrations of organic and inorganic material are known to reduce the CR of freshwater and marine bivalves (e.g., Foster‐Smith ; Madon et al ; Tuttle‐Raycraft et al ). The results of the present study demonstrate the complexity of the feeding response of mussels to a combination of TSS concentrations and water velocities—a combination that is more realistic and representative of riverine environments (Elbrecht et al ; Mustonen et al ). Simply, the negative effects of increasing TSS concentration on mussel CR were found to be ameliorated under increased water velocity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

Living the high turbidity life: The effects of total suspended solids, flow, and gill morphology on mussel feeding

Tuttle‐Raycraft

Ackerman

2019

Limnology & Oceanography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unionid mussels from clear‐water rivers are often found in turbid waters in which their feeding and reproductive efficiency should be impaired. We examined the feeding response of Lampsilis siliquoidea from a clear and turbid river in response to increased concentrations of total suspended solids (TSS) and water velocity in a funnel chamber and a recirculating flow chamber. Four TSS concentrations (0, 5, 20, and 100 mg L−1) and four velocities (0, 0.05, 0.15, and 0.25 m s−1) were used to create 16 experimental conditions corresponding to nine TSS flux (concentration × velocity) levels. TSS flux significantly affected clearance rates (CR); however, the relationship was complex. Increased TSS led to lower CR in mussels from clear and turbid river at all velocities; however, increases in velocity reduced the magnitude of the decline with respect to TSS. Overall, the turbid river mussels were less affected by increased TSS than those from the clear‐water rivers. The mussels from the turbid river also differed anatomically (i.e., greater palp:gill ratio; number of cilia per cirri; number of cirri cm−1; and thickness of palp cilia, and less cilia per unit area of palp) from the clear river animals. It is likely that these anatomical differences allow the mussels to feed more efficiently in turbid water, which explains the observed differences in CR response to TSS. These results demonstrate the importance of multistressor approaches in evaluating aquatic organisms, as well as providing a potential mechanism to explain how mussels thrive in turbid rivers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

Living the high turbidity life: The effects of total suspended solids, flow, and gill morphology on mussel feeding

Tuttle‐Raycraft

Ackerman

2019

Limnology & Oceanography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…; Mustonen et al . ). A positive effect of sedimentation on periphytic algae is, however, also possible, as a result of increased habitat heterogeneity at moderate fine sediment cover (Piggott et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…; Mustonen et al . ). Attempts to restore streams suffering from drainage impacts are fairly recent and little is known about their efficacy (but see Ramchunder, Brown & Holden ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Differential responses by stream and riparian biodiversity to in‐stream restoration of forestry‐impacted streams

Turunen

Aroviita

Marttila

et al. 2017

Journal of Applied Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Forestry can have detrimental impacts on stream ecosystems, particularly via excessive sedimentation. A key challenge to stream management is therefore to identify the best restoration practices to mitigate the harmful impacts of fine sediments on stream biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. We studied the effects of restoration of sediment‐impacted headwater streams on the habitat structure, hydrologic retention, biodiversity (microbes, bryophytes, benthic macroinvertebrates, riparian plants) and ecosystem functions (periphyton accrual rate and leaf breakdown) by comparing four treatments: wood‐restored, boulder‐restored, impacted (by fine sediments) and near‐natural streams. The restored streams were sampled 3–7 years post‐restoration. Restoration by wooden or boulder structures aimed to reduce deposited sediments and increase channel heterogeneity and hydraulic retention. Wooden structures were ineffective in removing fine bed sediments and did not induce positive responses in aquatic biota. Boulder additions reduced substrate limitation and thereby proved beneficial for aquatic bryophytes. Benthic macroinvertebrates were clearly impaired by sedimentation but responded weakly to restoration. Leaf‐decomposing microbes and ecosystem functions were unresponsive to restoration but neither did they differ between near‐natural and impacted streams, suggesting that they were little harmed by sedimentation. Wood addition enhanced hydraulic retention, and riparian plant assemblages along wood‐restored streams resembled those in near‐natural streams, suggesting that increased retention re‐established a more natural flood regime. By contrast, riparian plant assemblages in boulder‐restored streams did not differ from those in impacted streams. Synthesis and applications. Restoration improved several aspects of stream and/or riparian biodiversity, but had limited effects on ecosystem functions. Different restoration measures resulted in differing biodiversity outcomes: boulder addition was more effective at restoring in‐stream heterogeneity and aquatic biodiversity, whereas wooden structures helped restore channel hydrology and retentiveness, and, consequently, riparian vegetation. Therefore applying both measures in the restoration of forested headwater streams with naturally stony substrates enhances stream habitat variability at the watershed scale, providing the most promising scenario for biodiversity benefits in broad‐scale restoration designs. In‐stream restoration that increases hydraulic retention has impacts that extend beyond ecosystem boundaries, reinforcing the need to restore, manage and protect streams and their riparian forests in an integrated effort.

show abstract

“…, Mustonen et al. ). Such studies mostly focus on local, reach‐scale factors, largely neglecting the regional control of diversity and community composition (Ricklefs , Harrison and Cornell ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined effects of local habitat, anthropogenic stress, and dispersal on stream ecosystems: a mesocosm experiment

Turunen

Louhi

Mykrä

et al. 2018

Ecological Applications

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of anthropogenic stressors on community structure and ecosystem functioning can be strongly influenced by local habitat structure and dispersal from source communities. Catchment land uses increase the input of fine sediments into stream channels, clogging the interstitial spaces of benthic habitats. Aquatic macrophytes enhance habitat heterogeneity and mediate important ecosystem functions, being thus a key component of habitat structure in many streams. Therefore, the recovery of macrophytes following in-stream habitat modification may be prerequisite for successful stream restoration. Restoration success is also affected by dispersal of organisms from the source community, with potentially the strongest responses in relatively isolated headwater sites that receive a limited amount of dispersing individuals. We used a factorial design in a set of stream mesocosms to study the independent and combined effects of an anthropogenic stressor (sand sedimentation), local habitat (macrophytes, i.e., moss transplants), and enhanced dispersal (two levels: high vs. low) on organic matter retention, algal accrual rate, leaf decomposition, and macroinvertebrate community structure. Overall, all responses were simple additive effects with no interactions between treatments. Sand reduced algal accumulation, total invertebrate density, and density of a few individual taxa. Mosses reduced algal accrual rate and algae-grazing invertebrates, but enhanced organic matter retention and the number of detritus and filter feeders. Mosses also reduced macroinvertebrate diversity by increasing the dominance by a few taxa. Mosses reduced leaf mass loss, possibly because the organic matter retained by mosses provided an additional food source for leaf-shredding invertebrates and thus reduced shredder aggregation into leaf packs. The effect of mosses on macroinvertebrate communities and ecosystem functioning was distinct irrespective of the level of dispersal, suggesting strong environmental control of community structure. The strong environmental control of macroinvertebrate community composition even under enhanced dispersal suggests that re-establishing key habitat features, such as natural stream vegetation, could aid ecosystem recovery in boreal streams.

show abstract

Sediments and flow have mainly independent effects on multitrophic stream communities and ecosystem functions

Cited by 28 publications

References 66 publications

Living the high turbidity life: The effects of total suspended solids, flow, and gill morphology on mussel feeding

Living the high turbidity life: The effects of total suspended solids, flow, and gill morphology on mussel feeding

Differential responses by stream and riparian biodiversity to in‐stream restoration of forestry‐impacted streams

Combined effects of local habitat, anthropogenic stress, and dispersal on stream ecosystems: a mesocosm experiment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About