, Volume 589, Issue 1, pp 91–106 | Cite as

Macroinvertebrate community structure and biological traits related to flow permanence in a Mediterranean river network

  • Núria BonadaEmail author
  • Maria Rieradevall
  • Narcís Prat
Primary Research Paper


In Mediterranean climate areas, the great seasonal variability in temperature and rainfall is considered to be an evolutionary pressure that constrains plant and animal communities and their biological traits. Droughts alter habitat availability (changes of flow alter riffle-pool sequences), although habitat characteristics may also exacerbate drought to some extent. Using a simple quantitative index based on the proportion of conglomerate bedrock versus gravel and cobbles, pools versus riffles and winter versus summer flow, we show how habitat characteristics (in terms of substratum and flow) may influence the permanency of a stream site and how flow permanence constrains macroinvertebrate community structure and biological traits. Annual and seasonal macroinvertebrate richness, and the EPT (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera) and OCH (Odonata, Coleoptera and Hemiptera) metrics differed between permanent, intermittent and ephemeral sites, but not between permanent and intermittent sites. In contrast, distinct biological traits were observed in the three flow categories, although permanent sites presented few significant traits which was attributed to the stability of the habitat. Intermittent sites were dominated by taxa with pool-like strategies, while ephemeral sites were characterized by fauna with life-history adaptations to floods and droughts. In contrast to most traits (e.g., dissemination, reproduction, substrate relation), which were more constrained by local flow and substrate characteristics, life-cycle characteristics did not differ significantly among flow categories. This pattern can be explained by the features of the Mediterranean climate and particularly its high seasonal predictability, which serves as a large-scale filter of life-cycle traits, independently of local hydromorphological characteristics. Our findings indicate that drought is related to habitat characteristics and that local habitat variability favours organisms with certain traits, while other traits are independent of habitat variability on this scale and are probably affected by other large-scale habitat characteristics.


Natural disturbance Habitat Drought Temporary rivers Mediterranean rivers River Habitat Templet 



We thank P. Usseglio-Polatera for kindly providing the data on the degree of affinity of trait groups. We are very grateful to L. Bêche, J.D. Olden, V.H. Resh and D.D. Williams for their constructive comments on previous drafts of the manuscript, to M.À. Rodríguez and S. Vives for statistical advice. This research was supported by the “Diputació de Barcelona—Servei de Parcs Naturals” and a grant to N.B. from the “Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología” (Spain). We also thank Steven Declerck and two anonymous reviewers for their comments on the manuscript.

Supplementary material


  1. Abell, D. L., 1984. Benthic Invertebrates of some California Intermittent Streams. In Jain, S. & P. Moyle (eds), Vernal Pools and Intermittent Streams. Institute of Ecology Publication, UC Davis, Davis, 46–60.Google Scholar
  2. Biggs, B. J. F., R. J. Stevenson & R. L. Lowe, 1998. A habitat matrix conceptual model for stream periphyton. Archiv fur Hydrobiologie 143: 21–56.Google Scholar
  3. Bogan, M. T. & D. A. Lytle, 2007. Seasonal flow variation allows ‘time-sharing’ by disparate aquatic insect communities in montane desert streams. Freshwater Biology 52: 290–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bonada, N., M. Rieradevall, N. Prat & V. H. Resh, 2006. Benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages and macrohabitat connectivity in Mediterranean-climate streams of northern California. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 25: 32–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bonada, N., S. Dolédec & B. Statzner, in press. Taxonomic and biological trait differences of stream macroinvertebrate communities between mediterranean and temperate regions: implications for future climatic scenarios. Global Change Biology .Google Scholar
  6. Boulton, A. J., 2003. Parallels and contrasts in the effects of drought on stream macroinvertebrate assemblages. Freshwater Biology 48: 1173–1185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boulton, A. J. & P. J. Suter, 1986. Ecology of Temporary Streams—an Australian Perspective. In De Deckker, P. & W. D. Williams (eds), Limnology in Australia. Junk Publishers, Melbourne, 313–327.Google Scholar
  8. Boulton, A. J. & P. S. Lake, 1992a. The ecology of two intermittent streams in Victoria, Australia. II. Comparisons of faunal composition between habitats, rivers and years. Freshwater Biology 27: 99–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boulton, A. J. & P. S. Lake, 1992b. The ecology of two intermittent streams in Victoria, Australia. III. Temporal changes in faunal composition. Freshwater Biology 27: 123–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. del Rosario, R. B. & V. H. Resh, 2000. Invertebrates in intermittent and perennial streams: is the hyporheic zone a refuge from drying? Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19: 680–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Delucchi, C. M., 1988. Comparison of community structure among streams with different temporal flow regimes. Canadian Journal of Zoology 66: 579–586.Google Scholar
  12. Delucchi, C. M. & B. L. Peckarsky, 1989. Life history patterns of insects in an intermittent and a permanent stream. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 8: 308–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. di Castri, F., 1981. Mediterranean-type Shrublands of the World. In di Castri, F., D. W. Goodall & R. L. Specht (eds), Mediterranean-type Shrublands. Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1–643.Google Scholar
  14. Dolédec, S., D. Chessel, C. J. F. Ter Braak & S. Champely, 1996. Matching species traits to environmental variables: a new three-table ordination method. Environmental and Ecological Statistics 3: 143–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Feminella, J. W., 1996. Comparision of benthic macroinvertebrates assemblages in small streams along a gradient of flow permanence. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 15: 651–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ferreras-Romero, M. & A. M. García-Rojas, 1995. Life-history patterns and spatial separation exhibited by the Odonates from a Mediterranean inland catchment in southern Spain. Vie Milieu 45: 157–166.Google Scholar
  17. Fritz, K. M. & W. K. Dodds, 2005. Harshness: characterization of intermittent stream habitat over space and time. Marine and Freshwater Research 56: 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gasith, A. & V. H. Resh, 1999. Streams in mediterranean climate regions: abiotic influences and biotic responses to predictable seasonal events. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 30: 51–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hose, G. C., P. Jones & R. P. Lim, 2005. Hyporheic macroinvertebrates in riffle and pool areas of temporary streams in south eastern Australia. Hydrobiologia 532: 81–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Johansson, F., 2003. Latitudinal shifts in body size of Enallagma cyathigerum (Odonata). Journal of Biogeography 30: 29–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Joly, P. & A. Morand, 1994. Theoretical habitat templets, species traits, and species richness: amphibians in the Upper Rhône River and its floodplain. Freshwater Biology 31: 455–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Keddy, P. A., 1991. Working with Heterogeneity: an Operator’s Guide to Environmental Gradients. In Kolasa, J. & T. A. Pickett (eds), Ecological Heterogeneity. Springer-Verlag, New York, New Jersey, 181–201.Google Scholar
  23. Kolasa, J. & C. D. Rollo, 1991. The Heterogeneity of Heterogeneity: a Glossary. In Kolasa, J. & T. A. Pickett (eds), Ecological Heterogeneity. Springer-Verlag, New York, New Jersey, 1–23.Google Scholar
  24. Lake, P. S., 2000. Disturbance, patchiness, and diversity in streams. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19: 573–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lamouroux, N., N. L. Poff & P. Argermeier, 2002. Intercontinental convergence of stream fish community traits along geomorphic and hydraulic gradients. Ecology 83: 1792–1807.Google Scholar
  26. Lamouroux, N., S. Dolédec & S. Gayraud, 2004. Biological traits of stream macroinvertebrate communities: effects of microhabitat, reach, and basin filters. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 23: 449–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Langton, P. H. & J. Casas, 1999. Changes in chironomid assemblage composition in two Mediterranean mountain streams over a period of extreme hydrological conditions. Hydrobiologia 390: 37–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Legendre, P. & L. Legendre, 1998. Numerical Ecology. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  29. Legendre, P., R. Galzin & M. Harmelin-Vivien, 1997. Relating behavior to habitat: solutions to the fourth-corner problem. Ecology 78: 547–562.Google Scholar
  30. Legier, P. & J. Talin, 1973. Comparaison de ruisseaux permanents et temporaries de la Provence calcarie. Annales de Limnologie 9: 273–292.Google Scholar
  31. Lytle, D. A. & N. L. Poff, 2004. Adaptation to natural flow regimes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19: 94–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Magoulick, D. D. & R. Kobza, 2003. The role of refugia for fishes during drought: a review and synthesis. Freshwater Biology 48: 1186–1198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McElravy, E. P., G. A. Lamberti & V. H. Resh, 1989. Year-to-year variation in the aquatic macroinvertebrate fauna of a northern California stream. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 8: 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Miller, A. M. & S. W. Golladay, 1996. Effects of spates and drying on macroinvertebrate assemblages of an intermittent and a perennial prairie stream. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 15: 670–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Milne, B. T., 1991. Heterogeneity as a Multiscale Characteristic of Landscapes. In Kolasa, J. & T. A. Pickett (eds), Ecological Heterogeneity. Springer-Verlag, New York, 32–69.Google Scholar
  36. Muotka, T. & R. Virtaten, 1995. The stream as a habitat templet for bryophytes: species’ distributions along gradients in disturbance and substratum heterogeneity. Freshwater Biology 3: 141–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Olden, J. D. & N. L. Poff, 2003. Redundancy and the choice of hydrologic indices for characterizing streamflow regimes. River Research and Applications 19: 101–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pattee, E. & H. Chergui, 1995. The application of habitat templets and traits to hyphomycete fungi in a mid-European river system. Freshwater Biology 33: 525–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Persat, H., J.-M. Olivier & D. Pont, 1994. Theoretical habitat templets, species traits, and species richness: fish in the Upper Rhône River and its floodplain. Freshwater Biology 31: 439–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Poff, N. L., 1996. A hydrogeography of unregulated streams in the United States and an examination of scale-dependence in some hydrological descriptors. Freshwater Biology 36: 71–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Poff, N. L., 1997. Landscape filters and species traits: towards mechanistic understanding and prediction in stream ecology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16: 391–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Poff, N. L. & J. V. Ward, 1989. Implications of streamflow variability for lotic community structure: a regional analysis of streamflow patterns. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 46: 1805–1817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Poff, N. L. & J. V. Ward, 1990. Physical habitat template of lotic systems: recovery in the context of historical pattern of spatiotemporal heterogeneity. Environmental Management 14: 629–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Poff, N. L. & J. D. Allan, 1995. Functional organization of stream fish assemblages in relation to hydrological variability. Ecology 76: 606–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Poff, N. L., J. D. Olden, N. K. M. Vieira, D. S. Finn, M. P. Simmons & B. C. Kondratieff, 2006. Functional trait niches of North American lotic insects: traits-based ecological applications in light of phylogenetic relationships. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 25: 730–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Prat, N., M. A. Puig, G. Gonzàlez, M. F. Tort & M. Estrada, 1984. Llobregat. In Whitton B. A. (ed.), Ecology of European Rivers. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford: 527–551.Google Scholar
  47. Prat, N. & J. V. Ward, 1994. The Tamed River. In Margalef, R. (ed.), Lymnology now a Paradigm of Planetary Problems. Elsevier Science: 219–236.Google Scholar
  48. Prat, N., A. Munné, M. Rieradevall, F. Carcellar, J. Fons, G. Chacón, C. Ibañez, X. Font, J. M. Carmona & A. Romo, 2000. Biodiversity of a Mediterranean stream drainage network. Verhandlungen International Verein Limnology 27: 137–139.Google Scholar
  49. Resh, V. H. & D. M. Rosenberg, 1989. Spatial-temporal variability and the study of aquatic insects. The Canadian Entomologist 121: 941–963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Resh, V. H., A. V. Brown, A. P. Covich, M. E. Gurtz, H. W. Li, G. W. Minshall, S. R. Reice, A. L. Sheldon, J. B. Wallace & R. C. Wissmar, 1988. The role of disturbance in stream ecology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 7: 433–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Resh, V. H., A. G. Hildrew, B. Statzner & C. R. Townsend, 1994. Theoretical habitat templets, species traits, and species richness: a synthesis of long-term ecological research on the Upper Rhône River in the context of concurrently developed ecological theory. Freshwater Biology 31: 539–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ribera, I., S. Dolédec, I. S. Downie & G. N. Foster, 2001. Effect of land disturbance and stress on species traits of ground beetle assemblages. Ecology 82: 1112–1129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rieradevall, M., N. Bonada & N. Prat, 1999. Community structure and water quality in the mediterranean streams of a natural park (St. Llorenç del Munt, NE Spain). Limnetica 17: 45–56.Google Scholar
  54. Robles, S., M. Toro, C. Nuño, J. Avilés, J. Alba-Tercedor, M. Álvarez, N. Bonada, J. Casas, P. Jáimez-Cuéllar, A. Mellado, A. Munné, I. Pardo, N. Prat, M. L. Suárez, M. R. Vidal-Abarca, S. Vivas, G. Moyá & G. Ramon, 2004. Descripción de las cuencas mediterráneas seleccionadas en el proyecto GUADALMED. Limnetica 21(2002): 35–61.Google Scholar
  55. Smith, H., P. J. Wood & J. Gunn, 2003. The influence of habitat structure and flow permanence on invertebrate communities in karst spring systems. Hydrobiologia 510: 53–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Southwood, T. R. E., 1977. Habitat, the templet for ecological strategies? Journal of Animal Ecology 46: 337–365.Google Scholar
  57. Southwood, T. R. E., 1988. Tactics, strategies and templets. Oikos 52: 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Southwood, T. R. E., R. M. May, M. P. Hassell & G. R. Conway, 1974. Ecological strategies and population parameters. American Naturalist 108: 791–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Stamou, G. P., 1998, Arthropods of Mediterranean-type Ecosystems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 135.Google Scholar
  60. Stanley, E. H. & S. G. Fisher, 1992. Intermittency, Disturbance, and Stability in Stream Ecosystems. In Robarts, R. D. & M. L. Bothwell (eds), Aquatic Ecosystems in Semiarid Regions: Implications for Resource Management. Environmental Canada, Saskatoon: 271–280.Google Scholar
  61. Stanley, E. H., S. G. Fisher & N. B. Grimm, 1997. Ecosystem expansion and contraction in streams. BioScience 47: 427–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Stanley, E. H., S. G. Fisher & J. B. J. Jones, 2004. Effects of water loss on primary production: a landscape-scale model. Aquatic Sciences 66: 130–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Statzner, B., V. H. Resh & S. Dolédec (eds), 1994. Ecology of the Upper Rhône River: a Test of Habitat Templet Theories. Special Issue Freshwater Biology 31: 253–554.Google Scholar
  64. Statzner, B., K. Hoppenhaus, M. F. Arens & P. Richoux, 1997. Reproductive traits, habitat use and templet theory: a synthesis of world-wide data on aquatic insects. Freshwater Biology 38: 109–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tachet, H., P. Richoux, M. Bournaud & P. Usseglio-Polatera, 2002. Invertébrés d’Eau Douce (2nd corrected impression). CNRS éditions, Paris.Google Scholar
  66. Thuiller, W., S. Lavorel, G. Midgley, S. Lavergne & T. Rebelo, 2004. Relating plant traits and species distributions along bioclimatic gradients for 88 Leucadendron taxa. Ecology 85: 1688–1699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Townsend, C. R. & A. G. Hildrew, 1994. Species traits in relation to a habitat templet for river systems. Freshwater Biology 31: 265–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Townsend, C. R., M. R. Scarsbrook & S. Dolédec, 1997. Quantifying disturbance in streams: alternative measures of disturbance in relation to macroinvertebrate species traits and species richness. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16: 531–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Usseglio-Polatera, P., 1994. Theoretical habitat templets, species traits, and species richness: aquatic insects in the Upper R¨hône and its floodplain. Freshwater Biology 31: 417–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Usseglio-Polatera, P., M. Bournaud, P. Richoux & H. Tachet, 2000. Biological and ecological traits of benthic freshwater macroinvertebrates: relationships and definition of groups with similar traits. Freshwater Biology 43: 175–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Uys, M. C. & J. H. O’Keefe, 1997. Simple words and fuzzy zones: early directions for temporary research in South Africa. Environmental Management 21: 517–531.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Watling, J. R. & M. C. Press, 2000. Light Heterogeneity in Tropical Rain Forests: Photosynthetic Responses, their Ecological Consequences. In Hutchings, M. J., E. A. John & A. J. A. Stewart (eds), The Ecological Consequences of Environmental Heterogeneity. Blackwell Science, Oxford, 131–154.Google Scholar
  73. White, P. S. & J. Harrod, 1997. Disturbance and Diversity in a Landscape Context. In Bissonette, J. A. (ed.), Wildlife and Landscape Ecology: Effects of Pattern and Scale. Springer-Verlag, New York, 128–159.Google Scholar
  74. Wiens, J. A., 2000. Ecological Heterogeneity: an Ontogeny of Concepts and Approaches. In Hutchings, M. J., E. A. John & A. J. A. Stewart (eds), The Ecological Consequences of Environmental Heterogeneity. Blackwell Science, Oxford, 9–32.Google Scholar
  75. Williams, D. D., 1991. Life history traits of aquatic arthropods in springs. Memoirs of the entomological society of Canada 155: 63–87.Google Scholar
  76. Williams, D. D., 1996. Environmental constraits in temporary fresh waters and their consequences for the insect fauna. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 15: 634–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Williams, D. D. & H. B. N. Hynes, 1976. The ecology of temporary streams. I. The fauna of two Canadian streams. International Review Gesamten Hydrobiologie 61: 761–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wood, P. J. & P. D. Armitage, 1997. Biological effects of fine sediment in the lotic environment. Environmental Management 31: 203–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wright, J. F., P. D. Hiley, D. A. Cooling, A. C. Cameron, M. E. Wigham & A. D. Berrie, 1984. The invertebrate fauna of a small chalk stream in Berkshire, England, and the effect of intermittent flow. Archiv fur Hydrobiologie 99: 176–199.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Núria Bonada
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Maria Rieradevall
    • 1
  • Narcís Prat
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EcologyUniversity of BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Animal BiologyUniversity of GranadaGranadaSpain

Personalised recommendations