Temporal dynamics of aquatic communities and implications for pond conservation

Hassall, Christopher; Hollinshead, James Michael; Hull, A.P.

doi:10.1007/s10531-011-0223-9

Cited by 40 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 30 publications

(32 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, ephemeral pond invertebrate communities partially reflected the communities that preceded them (Jeffries, 2011). Similarly, macroinvertebrate biodiversity was recorded to increase temporally (over a 10 year study period) within ephemeral and perennial ponds in Cheshire, UK (Hassall et al, 2012). Macroinvertebrate diversity increased at an alpha scale (from 30 to 40 species) and gamma scale (from 181 to 209 species) between 1995/1996 and 2006 (Hassall et al, 2012).…”

Section: Temporal Biodiversity and Successionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Similarly, macroinvertebrate biodiversity was recorded to increase temporally (over a 10 year study period) within ephemeral and perennial ponds in Cheshire, UK (Hassall et al, 2012). Macroinvertebrate diversity increased at an alpha scale (from 30 to 40 species) and gamma scale (from 181 to 209 species) between 1995/1996 and 2006 (Hassall et al, 2012). The increase in gamma diversity has been attributed to the colonization by mobile species such as Coleoptera and Odonata from proximal ponds (Hassall et al, 2012).…”

Section: Temporal Biodiversity and Successionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…This in itself represents only a fraction of the overall biological diversity present within ponds. Aquatic macrophytes Jeffries, 2008;Hassall et al, 2012), algae (Asencio, 2014), and Zooplankton (Rundle et al, 2002;Drenner et al, 2009) are also very well represented within ponds and all six species of native UK amphibians (including the protected Great Crested Newt (Triturus cristatus) and the Natterjack Toad (Epidalea calamita)) utilise ponds (Boothby, 1997b;O'Brien, 2014;Peterman et al, 2014). In addition, the following section outlines the ecological importance of ponds to freshwater biodiversity.…”

Section: Macroinvertebrate Biodiversity Within Pond Habitatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The increase in gamma diversity has been attributed to the colonization by mobile species such as Coleoptera and Odonata from proximal ponds (Hassall et al, 2012). In contrast to Jeffries (2011), there was a reduction in temporal beta-diversity indicating that invertebrate community composition between the ponds was becoming more similar over time (Hassall et al, 2012).…”

Section: Temporal Biodiversity and Successionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There has been an increasing volume of published research on perennial and ephemeral pond biodiversity (Oertli et al, 2009) in both northern (Jeffries, 1991;Boothby et al, 1995a;Guest, 1997;Jeffries, 2011;Hassall et al, 2012) and southern UK (Rundle et al, 2002;Williams et al, 2003;Bilton et al, 2009;Armitage et al, 2012;Sayer et al, 2012 (Lott, 1999, unpublished data). At least one Red Data Book species was recorded from 26 of the 30 pond sites.…”

Section: Regional Context: Pond Biodiversity In the East Midlands Ukmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Ecological Drivers of Cladoceran Diversity in the Central European City (Łódź, Poland): Effects of Urbanisation and Size of the Waterbody

Pawlikiewicz¹,

Jurasz

2017

Annales Zoologici Fennici

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ponds are common and abundant features in nearly all landscapes typical of European lowland landscapes yet research on freshwater biodiversity has traditionally focussed on larger waterbodies such as lakes and rivers. This has led to an increased need to understand and quantify the biodiversity associated with pond habitats to better inform the active conservation and management of these small waterbodies. This thesis examines the aquatic macroinvertebrate biodiversity (alpha, beta and gamma) and conservation value of 95 ponds in Leicestershire, UK, across a variety of urban and rural landscape types and at a range of spatial scales. In addition, the relative importance of local (physicochemical and biological) and spatial (connectivity) variables in structuring macroinvertebrate communities within ponds is investigated. At a regional scale, the greatest macroinvertebrate biodiversity and conservation value was recorded within meadow ponds compared to urban, agricultural and forest ponds. Spatially, ponds were highly physically and biologically heterogeneous. Temporally (seasonally), invertebrate communities were most dissimilar in meadow and agricultural ponds but assemblages were similar in urban and forest ponds. In urban landscapes, park ponds supported a greater diversity of invertebrates than 'other' urban or garden ponds and typically had a greater conservation value. Garden ponds were the most taxon poor of those investigated. Perennial floodplain meadow ponds supported a greater biodiversity of invertebrates compared to ephemeral meadow ponds although conservation value was similar. Despite regular inundation from the River Soar, ephemeral ponds supported distinct communities compared to perennial meadow ponds. Aquatic macrophytes supported a higher diversity of taxa than other pond mesohabitats across all landscapes studied. Physicochemical factors were identified to be the dominant influence on macroinvertebrate assemblages although, a combination of local and spatial factors best explained the variation in community composition at a regional scale and for meadow ponds. Spatial factors were not identified to significantly influence urban pond communities. This study highlights the ecological importance and conservation value of ponds in rural and anthropogenically disturbed landscapes. Recognition of the significant contribution of ponds to freshwater biodiversity at regional and landscape scales is important for future conservation of pond habitats and will help focus and direct conservation strategies to where they are needed most.iv

show abstract

Section: Temporal Biodiversity and Successionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Temporal Biodiversity and Successionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Macroinvertebrate Biodiversity Within Pond Habitatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Temporal Biodiversity and Successionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Regional Context: Pond Biodiversity In the East Midlands Ukmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Ecological Drivers of Cladoceran Diversity in the Central European City (Łódź, Poland): Effects of Urbanisation and Size of the Waterbody

Pawlikiewicz¹,

Jurasz

2017

Annales Zoologici Fennici

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The role of pond management for biodiversity conservation in an agricultural landscape

Sayer

Andrews

Shilland

et al. 2012

Aquatic Conservation

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Debate surrounds the best way to deal with pond terrestrialization so as to maximize landscape-scale biodiversity. One way of addressing this issue is to re-set succession via management activities, but the merits of this approach relative to non-intervention and pond creation are little known. Manor Farm in Norfolk, UK, possesses around 40 ponds, and each year three to four ponds are subject to management involving tree (de-shading) and/or sediment removal. To determine the consequences of management for pond biodiversity, macrophyte and invertebrate communities were surveyed for replicate ponds covering four ???time since management??? categories: no management, and managed over the periods 1999???2003, 2004???2006 and 2007???2009. Macrophyte diversity was significantly lower in unmanaged ponds compared with ponds managed in 2004???2006 and 2007???2009. In addition, with the exception of Mollusca, invertebrate diversity was significantly lower in the unmanaged ponds compared with all the managed ponds. A tendency was evident for diversity to peak 3???5 years after management and for a subsequent decline in diversity (significant for macrophytes). No distinctive species assemblages were associated with the different pond successional stages, although several species were confined to individual ponds. Although many species were absent from the non-managed ponds, especially in the macrophytes and Coleoptera, few species were unique to these ponds. The principal driver of species turnover in the ponds was shade, which was negatively correlated with macrophyte cover. Shade was substantially higher in the unmanaged ponds, whose species-poor assemblages appeared to be a consequence of low oxygen levels. By arresting succession and restoring macrophyte-dominated early- and mid-successional ponds, management may have an essential role in biodiversity conservation. In pond-rich landscapes, where a high proportion of ponds are heavily terrestrialized, management provides a sustainable means both of preserving heterogeneity in the pond network and preventing the loss of large numbers of species which favour early- and mid-successional pond

show abstract

Conservation of aquatic invertebrates: concerns, challenges and conundrums

Collier

Probert

Jeffries

2016

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT1. Invertebrates inhabiting marine and freshwater ecosystems make important contributions to global biodiversity and provide significant services that have cascading effects across ecosystems. However, this group is grossly under-represented in assessments of conservation status and often neglected in targeted aquatic conservation efforts.2. In global assessments of 7857 freshwater invertebrates and 2864 marine invertebrates, 30-34% were considered Data Deficient highlighting the paucity of information for making such assessments. Of the invertebrate groups that could be assessed, those with poor dispersal abilities and high local endemism, such as many gastropods, crayfish and mussels, are the most threatened.3. Springs and subterranean hydrological systems support the highest proportions of threatened freshwater species, while in marine environments coral reefs, lagoons and anchialine systems are particularly vulnerable.4. Key agents of biodiversity decline in aquatic ecosystems are water pollution, overexploitation and harvesting, habitat degradation and destruction, alien invasive species, and climate change. Effects of dams and water management along with pollution from urban, agricultural and forestry sources are the main threats in freshwater ecosystems, whereas a broad range of factors have impacts on marine invertebrates, including biological resource use.5. Significant impediments facing conservation of aquatic invertebrates are limited knowledge of their diversity, the need for broadscale actions to account for connectivity within and across ecosystems, lack of political will and investment, and the prospect that conditions may get worse before they improve, possibly not in time to save some already highly imperilled invertebrate species from extinction.

show abstract

Temporal dynamics of aquatic communities and implications for pond conservation

Cited by 40 publications

References 30 publications

Ecological Drivers of Cladoceran Diversity in the Central European City (Łódź, Poland): Effects of Urbanisation and Size of the Waterbody

Ecological Drivers of Cladoceran Diversity in the Central European City (Łódź, Poland): Effects of Urbanisation and Size of the Waterbody

The role of pond management for biodiversity conservation in an agricultural landscape

Conservation of aquatic invertebrates: concerns, challenges and conundrums

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About