Advertisement

Regional Environmental Change

, Volume 15, Issue 8, pp 1743–1755 | Cite as

Landscape and local factors influence water purification in the Monteregian agroecosystem in Québec, Canada

  • Marta TerradoEmail author
  • Romà Tauler
  • Elena M. Bennett
Original Article

Abstract

The management of riparian areas in agricultural regions is important for the protection of water quality. In Québec, a buffer strip of at least three meters width is required for riparian buffers adjacent to agricultural areas. However, other qualities of the riparian area and the surrounding landscape may affect the ability of a system to deliver a water purification ecosystem service. This study, located in a tile-drained agroecosystem in the Montérégie (Québec, Canada), aims to unravel the importance of local factors (the environment adjacent to the stream) and landscape factors (the environment in the whole drainage basin) in water purification through sediment and nutrient retention. We assessed riparian and water quality in twenty-one sites distributed among four headwater streams. A regression analysis indicates that both landscape and local variables influence the provision of water purification. We therefore suggest that the effect of riparian buffers might be mediated by other factors such as subsurface drainage or local land management. Landscape configuration (the geometry and location of various land uses) was identified as playing a key role in the level of ecosystem services provided. We suggest that management of water quality in agroecosystems should focus both on buffer strips and on management of larger source areas in the basin. Interventions should not be only limited to recommendations for buffer width, but should also consider interactions between other local and landscape factors.

Keywords

Riparian quality Ecosystem services Water purification Agriculture Water quality Landscape configuration 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education through the National Program for the Mobility of Human Resources from the National Plan I-D + I 2008–2011 and by an NSERC Strategic Projects grant. The authors would like to thank people in E. Bennett’s laboratory for their assistance in sampling, and A. Gonzalez for help with study design. We thank H. Lalande for allowing us to use the laboratory facilities and the people from the Gault Nature Reserve for caring so much about our work.

Supplementary material

10113_2014_733_MOESM1_ESM.tif (13.2 mb)
Composition (loading plots) and spatial distribution (score plots) of the four principal components identified in the PCA of physicochemical data in the studied streams (see Table 2 for variable identification) (TIFF 13,466 kb)

References

  1. Baker ME, Weller DE, Jordan TE (2006) Improved methods for quantifying potential nutrient interception by riparian buffers. Landsc Ecol 21:1327–1345. doi: 10.1007/s10980-006-0020-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balana BB, Lago M, Baggaley N, Castellazzi M, Sample J, Stutter M, Slee B, Vinten A (2012) Integrating economic and biophysical data in assessing cost-effectiveness of buffer strip placement. J Environ Qual 41:380–388. doi: 10.2134/jeq2010.0544 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beauchemin S, Simard RR, Cluis D (1998) Forms and concentration of phosphorus in drainage water of twenty-seven tile-drained soils. J Environ Qual 27:721–728. doi: 10.2134/jeq1998.00472425002700030033x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Belmar O, Bruno D, Martínez-Capel F, Barquín J, Belasco J (2013) Effects of flow regime alteration on fluvial habitats and riparian quality in a semiarid Mediterranean basin. Ecol Indic 30:52–64. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.01.042 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chapman AS, Foster IDL, Lees JA, Hodgkinson RA, Jackson RH (2001) Particulate phosphorus transport by subsurface drainage from agricultural land in the UK: environmental significance at the catchment and national scale. Sci Total Environ 266:95–102. doi: 10.1016/S0048-9697(00)00734-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. CRAAQ (2003) Reference fertilization guide. Reference Centre in Agriculture and Agri-Food of Quebec, QuébecGoogle Scholar
  7. Daily G (1997) Nature’s service: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  8. del Tánago MG, de Jalón DG (2006) Attributes for assessing the environmental quality of riparian zones. Limnetica 25:389–402Google Scholar
  9. del Tánago MG, de Jalón DG (2011) Riparian quality index (RQI): a methodology for characterizing and assessing environmental conditions of riparian zones. Limnetica 30:235–254Google Scholar
  10. del Tánago MG, de Jalón DG, Martínez R (2004) Geomorphological characterization of the stream network of Alto and Medio Guadiana (in Spanish). Technical Report, CEDEX, MadridGoogle Scholar
  11. Dormann CF, McPherson JM, Araújo MB, Bivand R, Bolliger J, Carl G, Davies RG, Hirzel A, Jetz W, Kissling D, Kühn I, Ohlemüller R, Peres-Neto PR, Reineking B, Schröder B, Schurr FM, Wilson R (2007) Methods to account for spatial autocorrelation in the analysis of species distributional data: a review. Ecography 30:609–628. doi: 10.1111/j.2007.0906-7590.05171.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dosskey MG, Vidon P, Gurwick NP, Allan CJ, Duval TP, Lowrance R (2010) The role of riparian vegetation in protecting and improving chemical water quality in streams. J Am Water Resour Assoc 46:261–277. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2010.00419.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Farnham IM, Singh AK, Stetzenbach KJ, Johannesson KH (2002) Treatment of nondetects in multivariate analysis of groundwater geochemistry data. Chem Intell Lab Syst 60:265–281. doi: 10.1016/S0169-7439(01)00201-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gentry LE, David MB, Royer TV, Mitchell CA, Starks KM (2007) Phosphorus transport pathways to streams in tile-drained agricultural watersheds. J Environ Qual 36:408–415. doi: 10.2134/jeq2006.0098 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heinen M, Noij IGAM, Heesmans HIM, van Groenigen JW, Groenendijk P, Thissen JTNM (2012) A novel method to determine buffer strip effectiveness on deep soils. J Environ Qual 41:334–347. doi: 10.2134/jeq2010.0452 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hunsaker C, Levine D (1995) Hierarchical approaches to the study of water quality in rivers. Bioscience 45:193–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Johnson L, Richards C, Host G, Arthur J (1997) Landscape influences on water chemistry in Midwestern stream ecosystems. Freshwater Biol 37:193–208. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2427.1997.d01-539.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jolliffe IT (2002) Principal component analysis. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Kronvang B, Audet J, Baattrup-Pedersen A, Jensen HS, Larsen SE (2012) Phosphorus load to surface water from bank erosion in a Danish lowland river basin. J Environ Qual 41:304–313. doi: 10.2134/jeq2010.0434 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lapp P, Madramootoo CA, Enright P, Papineau F, Perrone J (1998) Water quality of an intensive agricultural watershed in Quebec. J Am Water Resour Assoc 34:427–437. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.1998.tb04146.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liu X, Zhang X, Zhang M (2008) Major factors influencing the efficacy of vegetated buffers on sediment trapping: a review and analysis. J Environ Qual 37:1667–1674. doi: 10.2134/jeq2007.0437 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lowrance R, Todd R, Fail JJ, Hendrickson OJ, Leonard R, Asmussen L (1984) Riparian forests as nutrient filters in agricultural watersheds. Bioscience 34:374–377. doi: 10.2307/1309729 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Martens H, Naes T (1991) Multivariate calibration. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Mayer PM, Reynolds SK, McCutchen MD Jr, Canfield TJ (2007) Meta-analysis of nitrogen removal in riparian buffers. J Environ Qual 36:1172–1180. doi: 10.2134/jeq2006.0462 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McCracken DI, Cole LJ, Harrison W, Robertson D (2012) Improving the farmland biodiversity value of riparian buffer strips: conflicts and compromises. J Environ Qual 41:355–363. doi: 10.2134/jeq2010.0532 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. MDDEP (2005) Politique de protection des rives, du littoral et des plaines inondables [Law for the protection of shores, litoral and floodplains]. Ministry of Sustainable Development, Environment and Parks, Québec’s GovernmentGoogle Scholar
  27. Meyer JL, Wallace JB (2001) Lost linkages and lotic ecology: rediscovering small streams. In: Press MC, Huntly NJ, Levin S (eds) Ecology: achievement and challenge. Blackwell Science Ltd., MaldenGoogle Scholar
  28. Mitchell MGE, Bennett EM, Gonzalez A (2013) Linking landscape connectivity and ecosystem service provision: current knowledge and research gaps. Ecosystems 16:894–908. doi: 10.1007/s10021-013-9647-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mont-Saint-Hilaire Nature Centre (2012) Characterization of riparian zones in Mont-Saint-Hilaire streams (in French)Google Scholar
  30. Munné AN, Prat N, Solà C, Bonada N, Rieradevall M (2003) A simple field method for assessing the ecological quality of riparian habitat in rivers and streams: QBR index. Aquatic Conserv: Mar Freshw Ecosyst 13:147–163. doi: 10.1002/aqc.529 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Navarro-Llácer C, Baeza D, de las Heras J (2010) Assessment of regulated rivers with índices based on macroinvertebrates, fish and riparian forest in the southeast of Spain. Ecol Indic 10:935–942. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.02.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Noij IGAM, Heinen M, Heesmans HIM, Thissen JTNM, Groenendijk P (2012) Effectiveness of unfertilized buffer strups for reducing nitrogen loads from agricultural lowland to surface waters. J Environ Qual 41:322–333. doi: 10.2134/jeq2010.0545 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Osborne LL, Kovacic DA (1993) Riparian vegetated buffer strips in water-quality restoration and stream management. Freshwater Biol 29:243–258. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.1993.tb00761.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Osborne LL, Wiley MJ (1988) Empirical relationships between land use/cover and stream water quality in an agricultural watershed. J Environ Manage 26:9–27Google Scholar
  35. Petersen R (1992) The RCE: a riparian, channel and environmental inventory for small streams in the agricultural landscape. Freshwater Biol 27:295–306. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.1992.tb00541.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Royer TV, David MB, Gentry LE (2006) Timing of riverine export of nitrate and phosphorus from agricultural watersheds in Illinois: implications for reducing nutrient loading to the Mississippi River. Environ Sci Technol 40:4126–4131. doi: 10.1021/es052573n CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Saint-Jacques N, Richard Y (1998) Development of a riparian quality index: application to the rivière Chaudière and relation with the biotic integrity of the aquatic environment. Direction of aquatic ecosystems, QuebecGoogle Scholar
  38. Stutter MI, Chardon WJ, Kronvang B (2012) Riparian buffer strips as a multifunctional management tool in agricultural landscapes: introduction. J Environ Qual 41:297–303. doi: 10.2134/jeq2011.0439 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Terrado M, Acuña V, Ennaanay D, Tallis H, Sabater S (2014) Impact of climate extremes on hydrological ecosystem services in a heavily humanized Mediterranean basin. Ecol Indic 37:199–209. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.01.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tran CP, Bode RW, Smith AJ, Kleppel GS (2010) Land-use proximity as a basis for assessing stream water quality in New York State (USA). Ecol Indic 10:727–733. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.12.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Uriarte M, Yackulic CB, Lim Y, Arce-Nazario JA (2011) Influence of land use on water quality in a tropical landscape: a multi-scale analysis. Landsc Ecol 26:1151–1164. doi: 10.1007/s10980-011-9642-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Verstraeten G, Poesen J, Gillijns K, Govers G (2006) The use of riparian vegetated filter strips to reduce river sediments loads: an overestimated control measure? Hydrol Process 20:4259–4267. doi: 10.1002/hyp.6155 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Vidon P, Allan C, Burns D, Duval TP, Gurwick N, Inamdar S, Lowrance R, Okay J, Scott D, Sebestyen S (2010) Hot spots and hot moments in riparian zones: potential for improved water quality management. J Am Water Resour Assoc 46:278–298. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2010.00420.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Villamagna AM, Angermeier PL, Bennett EM (2013) Capacity, demand, pressure and flow: a conceptual framework for analyzing ecosystem service provision and delivery. Ecol Complex 15:114–121. doi: 10.1016/j.ecocom.2013.07.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wall GJ, Coote DR, Pringle EA, Shelton IJ (2002) RUSLEFAC. Revised universal soil loss equation for application in Canada. A handbook for estimating soil loss from water erosion in Canada. Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  46. Ward TA, Tate KW, Atwill ER (2003) Visual assessment of riparian health. Rangeland Monitoring Series. University of California, Davis, CAGoogle Scholar
  47. Weller DE, Jordan TE, Correll DL (1998) Heuristic models for material discharge from landscapes with riparian buffers. Ecol Appl 8:1156–1169. doi: 10.1890/1051-0761 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Winward AH (2000) Monitoring the vegetation resources in riparian areas. USDA Forest Service, OgdenGoogle Scholar
  49. Wold S, Sjöström M, Eriksson L (2001) PLS-regression: a basic tool of chemometrics. Chemometr Intell Lab 58:109–130. doi: 10.1016/S0169-7439(01)00155-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Woodcock T, Mihuc T, Romanowicz E, Allen E (2004) Land-use effects on catchment and patch: scale habitat and macroinvertebrate response in the Adirondack Uplands. Landscape Influences on Stream Habitats and Biological Assemblages 48:395–411Google Scholar
  51. Zaimes GN, Schultz RC, Isenhart TM (2004) Stream bank erosion adjacent to riparian forest buffers, row-crop fields, and continuously-grazed pastures along Bear Creek in central Iowa. J Soil Water Conserv 59:19–27Google Scholar
  52. Zedler JB (2003) Wetlands at your service: reducing impacts of agriculture at the watershed scale. Front Ecol Environ 1:65–72. doi: 10.1890/1540-9295 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marta Terrado
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Romà Tauler
    • 3
  • Elena M. Bennett
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Natural Resource SciencesMcGill UniversitySainte-Anne-de-BellevueCanada
  2. 2.Catalan Institute for Water Research (ICRA), Scientific and Technological ParkUniversity of GironaGironaSpain
  3. 3.Institute of Environmental Assessment and Water Research (IDAEA)Spanish Council for Scientific Research (CSIC)BarcelonaSpain
  4. 4.McGill School of EnvironmentMcGill UniversitySainte-Anne-de-BellevueCanada

Personalised recommendations