Stream primary producers relate positively to watershed natural gas measures in north-central Arkansas streams

Austin, Bradley J.; Hardgrave, Natalia; Inlander, Ethan; Gallipeau, Cory; Entrekin, Sally A.; Evans‐White, Michelle A.

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.05.030

Cited by 10 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…, Austin et al. ). These water quality changes have been linked to accidental spills during transport, leaky infrastructure (e.g., pipes and storage ponds), and intentional releases (Patz et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, increased nutrients and solar radiation resulting from decreased riparian cover could augment in‐stream primary production (Austin et al. ), benefiting algivorous species and negatively affecting other species. Many of these modifications to habitat, water quality, and basal food availability have been observed in streams surrounded by ONGD in shale plays in the Appalachians (Olmstead et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A mechanistic understanding of ecological responses to land‐use change in headwater streams

Walker

Walters

2019

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anthropogenic activities, such as oil and natural gas development (ONGD), have significantly altered the landscape. It is often challenging to identify the mechanistic processes underlying ecological responses to land‐use change (LUC). In aquatic ecosystems, alterations to habitat and food availability and water quality associated with increased LUC are key mechanistic pathways that deserve management consideration. We used structural equation modeling to evaluate how LUC associated with ONGD could influence macroinvertebrate and fish across 40 sites in six headwater streams in the Wyoming Range of the Upper Green River Basin, Wyoming. The most important mechanistic pathway varied, but responses were frequently driven by a direct effect of LUC or related to changes in food availability and water quality. Habitat complexity was the least important mechanistic pathway in our models. Our results also highlight that responses may reflect an organism's degree of habitat or resource specialization and/or sensitivity to changes in water quality. Habitat pathways were more important for habitat specialists (e.g., Mottled Sculpin, Cottus bairdii), food pathways were more important for food specialists (e.g., Colorado River Cutthroat Trout, Oncorhynchus clarki pleuriticus; Mountain Sucker, Catostomus platyrhynchus), and sensitivity to increased salinity was important for intolerant species (e.g., O. clarki, C. bairdii, and predatory macroinvertebrates). Continued identification of the specific mechanisms underlying species’ responses to increased LUC will aid in the conservation of ecologically and economically important species.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A mechanistic understanding of ecological responses to land‐use change in headwater streams

Walker

Walters

2019

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The topography of this region is a limestone-based karst, with numerous emergent ground and spring-fed streams. Previous studies have assessed the potential impacts of fracking in these streams by focusing on either stream metabolism [ 19 ] or the presence/absence of aquatic insects as bioindicator species [ 20 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do biofilm communities respond to the chemical signatures of fracking? A test involving streams in North-central Arkansas

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundUnconventional natural gas (UNG) extraction (fracking) is ongoing in 29 North American shale basins (20 states), with ~6000 wells found within the Fayetteville shale (north-central Arkansas). If the chemical signature of fracking is detectable in streams, it can be employed to bookmark potential impacts. We evaluated benthic biofilm community composition as a proxy for stream chemistry so as to segregate anthropogenic signatures in eight Arkansas River catchments. In doing so, we tested the hypothesis that fracking characteristics in study streams are statistically distinguishable from those produced by agriculture or urbanization.ResultsFour tributary catchments had UNG-wells significantly more dense and near to our sampling sites and were grouped as ‘potentially-impacted catchment zones’ (PICZ). Four others were characterized by significantly larger forested area with greater slope and elevation but reduced pasture, and were classified as ‘minimally-impacted’ (MICZ). Overall, 46 bacterial phyla/141 classes were identified, with 24 phyla (52%) and 54 classes (38%) across all samples. PICZ-sites were ecologically more variable than MICZ-sites, with significantly greater nutrient levels (total nitrogen, total phosphorous), and elevated Cyanobacteria as bioindicators that tracked these conditions. PICZ-sites also exhibited elevated conductance (a correlate of increased ion concentration) and depressed salt-intolerant Spartobacteria, suggesting the presence of brine as a fracking effect. Biofilm communities at PICZ-sites were significantly less variable than those at MICZ-sites.ConclusionsStudy streams differed by Group according to morphology, land use, and water chemistry but not in biofilm community structure. Those at PICZ-sites covaried according to anthropogenic impact, and were qualitatively similar to communities found at sites disturbed by fracking. The hypothesis that fracking signatures in study streams are distinguishable from those produced by other anthropogenic effects was statistically rejected. Instead, alterations in biofilm community composition, as induced by fracking, may be less specific than initially predicted, and thus more easily confounded by agriculture and urbanization effects (among others). Study streams must be carefully categorized with regard to the magnitude and extent of anthropogenic impacts. They must also be segregated with statistical confidence (as herein) before fracking impacts are monitored.

show abstract

“…An empirical study in Arkansas streams documented reduced reproductive success of redfin darter, Etheostoma whipplei (Girard), in areas with higher ONG development, likely due to increased siltation from surface disturbance (Stearman, Adams & Adams, ). Other empirical studies in Arkansas streams found increased sediment and primary productivity in streams closest to well pads; this had implications for macroinvertebrate communities but effects interacted with hydrology (Austin et al., ; Johnson et al., ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Evaluating relationships between native fishes and habitat in streams affected by oil and natural gas development

Girard

Walters

2018

Fisheries Management Eco

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oil and natural gas (ONG) development can affect aquatic ecosystems through water contamination, water withdrawals and disturbance of soil and vegetation (surface disturbance) from infrastructure development. Research on how these potential sources of watershed and aquatic ecosystem impairment can affect fish assemblages is limited. Fish–habitat relationships were evaluated across stream sites experiencing differing levels of ONG development. Colorado River cutthroat trout, Oncorhynchus clarkii pleuriticus (Cope), and mottled sculpin, Cottus bairdii Girard, presence and abundance were associated with habitat conditions predominantly found in the less disturbed streams, such as higher proportion of shrub cover, greater stream depths and gravel substrate. Mountain sucker, Catostomus platyrhynchus (Cope), appeared to be a habitat generalist and was able to persist in a wide range of conditions, including degraded sites. Natural resource managers can use habitat preferences of these fish species to establish the development plans that mitigate negative effects of ONG development by protecting the aquatic habitats they rely upon.

show abstract

Stream primary producers relate positively to watershed natural gas measures in north-central Arkansas streams

Cited by 10 publications

References 41 publications

A mechanistic understanding of ecological responses to land‐use change in headwater streams

A mechanistic understanding of ecological responses to land‐use change in headwater streams

Do biofilm communities respond to the chemical signatures of fracking? A test involving streams in North-central Arkansas

Evaluating relationships between native fishes and habitat in streams affected by oil and natural gas development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About