Advertisement

Hydrobiologia

, Volume 769, Issue 1, pp 79–92 | Cite as

Structural and functional responses of floodplain vegetation to stream ecosystem restoration

  • Emma GötheEmail author
  • Allan Timmermann
  • Kathrin Januschke
  • Annette Baattrup-Pedersen
RIVER RESTORATION EFFECTS

Abstract

Most river restoration projects have applied relatively small-scale measures focused on improving specific instream conditions, with only limited outcomes for biodiversity in rivers and their adjacent riparian habitats. Here, we investigate the effects of both small- and large-scale restoration projects on floodplain vegetation across 20 European catchments. We focused on the roles of different restoration parameters (i.e., the number, spatial extent and type of restoration measure applied and restoration age) and specific environmental characteristics in regulating changes in plant diversity and trait composition following restoration. Among restoration characteristics, restoration type was the only significant determinant of plant community responses, with stream channel widening having the strongest effects, particularly on the diversity and composition of species traits favoured by increases in physical disturbance (e.g. flooding) and open habitat patch availability (e.g. plant growth form, life strategy and life span). Of the environmental variables, altitude and discharge were positively and most strongly related to responses of both species and trait diversity. Our results emphasise the value of (i) choosing relevant restoration measures that affect environmental conditions of importance for the target organism group and (ii) conducting restoration projects in environmental settings where the likelihood of restoration “success” is maximised.

Keywords

Plants Diversity Traits River Disturbance Flooding 

Notes

Acknowledgment

The authors thank the European Union 7th Framework Project REFORM under contract no. 282656 for financial support. We also thank Brendan Mckie and one anonymous reviewer for helpful and constructive comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.

References

  1. Anderson, M. J., 2006. Distance-based tests for homogeneity of multivariate dispersions. Biometrics 62: 245–253.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson, E., C. Nilsson & M. E. Johansson, 2000. Plant dispersal in boreal rivers and its relation to the diversity of riparian flora. Journal of Biogeography 27: 1095–1106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernhardt, E. S., M. A. Palmer, J. D. Allan, G. Alexander, K. Barnas, S. Brooks, J. Carr, S. Clayton, C. Dahm, J. Follstad-Shah, D. Galat, S. Gloss, P. Goodwin, D. Hart, B. Hassett, R. Jenkinson, S. Katz, G. M. Kondolf, P. S. Lake, R. Lave, J. L. Meyer, T. K. O’Donnell, L. Pagano, B. Powell & E. Sudduth, 2005. Synthesizing U.S. River restoration efforts. Science 308: 636–637.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Blanchet, F. G., P. Legendre & D. Borcard, 2008. Forward selection of explanatory variables. Ecology 89: 2623–2632.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Boedeltje, G. E. R., J. P. Bakker, A. Ten Brinke, J. M. Van Groenendael & M. Soesbergen, 2004. Dispersal phenology of hydrochorous plants in relation to discharge, seed release time and buoyancy of seeds: the flood pulse concept supported. Journal of Ecology 92: 786–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bohn, B. A. & J. L. Kershner, 2002. Establishing aquatic restoration priorities using a watershed approach. Journal of Environmental Management 64: 355–363.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bond, N. R. & P. S. Lake, 2003. Local habitat restoration in streams: constraints on the effectiveness of restoration for stream biota. Ecological Management & Restoration 4: 193–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borcard, D., P. Legendre & P. Drapeau, 1992. Partialling out the spatial component of ecological variation. Ecology 73: 1045–1055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dorrough, J. & M. P. Scroggie, 2008. Plant responses to agricultural intensification. Journal of Applied Ecology 45: 1274–1283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dudgeon, D., A. H. Arthington, M. O. Gessner, Z. I. Kawabata, D. J. Knowler, C. Leveque, R. J. Naiman, A. H. Prieur-Richard, D. Soto, M. L. J. Stiassny & C. A. Sullivan, 2006. Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biological Reviews 81: 163–182.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Ellenberg, H., H. E. Weber, R. Dull, V. Wirth, W. Werner & D. Paulissen, 1991. Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. Scripta Geobotanica 18: 1–248.Google Scholar
  12. Engström, J., C. Nilsson & R. Jansson, 2009. Effects of stream restoration on dispersal of plant propagules. Journal of Applied Ecology 46: 397–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Feld, C. K., S. Birk, D. C. Bradley, D. Hering, J. Kail, A. Marzin, A. Melcher, D. Nemitz, M. L. Petersen, F. Pletterbauer, D. Pont, P. F. M. Verdonschot & N. Friberg, 2011. From natural to degraded rivers and back again: a test of restoration ecology theory and practice. Advances in Ecological Research 44: 119–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fischer, J. & D. B. Lindenmayer, 2007. Landscape modification and habitat fragmentation: a synthesis. Global Ecology and Biogeography 16: 265–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Frainer, A., B. G. McKie & B. Malmqvist, 2014. When does diversity matter? Species functional diversity and ecosystem functioning across habitats and seasons in a field experiment. Journal of Animal Ecology 83: 460–469.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Glaeser, J. & M. Wulf, 2009. Effects of water regime and habitat continuity on the plant species composition of floodplain forests. Journal of Vegetation Science 20: 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gore, J. A. & A. M. Milner, 1990. Island biogeographical theory: can it be used to predict lotic recovery rates? Environmental Management 14: 737–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gregory, S. V., F. J. Swanson, W. A. Mckee & K. W. Cummins, 1991. An ecosystem perspective of riparian zones. Bioscience 41: 540–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Grime, J. P., 1979. Plant strategies and vegetation processes. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  20. Grime, J. P., J. G. Hodgson & R. Hunt, 2007. Comparative plant ecology: a functional approach to common British species, 2nd ed. Castlepoint Press, Dalbeattie.Google Scholar
  21. Gurnell, A., J. Goodson, K. Thompson, N. Clifford & P. Armitage, 2007. The river-bed: a dynamic store for plant propagules? Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 32: 1257–1272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hamilton, S. K., 2012. Biogeochemical time lags may delay responses of streams to ecological restoration. Freshwater Biology 57: 43–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Harding, J. S., E. F. Benfield, P. V. Bolstad, G. S. Helfman & E. B. D. Jones, 1998. Stream biodiversity: the ghost of land use past. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 95: 14843–14847.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Hasselquist, E. M., C. Nilsson, J. Hjältén, D. Jørgensen, L. Lind & L. E. Polvi, 2014. Time for recovery of riparian plants in restored northern Swedish streams: a chronosequence study. Ecological Applications. doi: 10.1890/14-1102.1.Google Scholar
  25. Hill, M. O., D. B. Roy, J. O. Mountford & R. G. H. Bunce, 2000. Extending Ellenberg’s indicator values to a new area: an algorithmic approach. Journal of Applied Ecology 37: 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hunt, R., J. G. Hodgson, K. Thompson, P. Bungener, N. P. Dunnett & A. P. Askew, 2004. A new practical tool for deriving a functional signature for herbaceous vegetation. Applied Vegetation Science 7: 163–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Huxel, G. R. & A. Hastings, 1999. Habitat loss, fragmentation, and restoration. Restoration Ecology 7: 309–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kleyer, M., R. M. Bekker, I. C. Knevel, J. P. Bakker, K. Thompson, M. Sonnenschein, P. Poschlod, J. M. Van Groenendael, L. Klimeš, J. Klimešová, S. Klotz, G. M. Rusch, M. Hermy, D. Adriaens, G. Boedeltje, B. Bossuyt, A. Dannemann, P. Endels, L. Götzenberger, J. G. Hodgson, A. K. Jackel, I. Kühn, D. Kunzmann, W. A. Ozinga, C. Römermann, M. Stadler, J. Schlegelmilch, H. J. Steendam, O. Tackenberg, B. Wilmann, J. H. C. Cornelissen, O. Eriksson, E. Garnier & B. Peco, 2008. The LEDA Traitbase: a database of life-history traits of the Northwest European flora. Journal of Ecology 96: 1266–1274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lake, P. S., N. Bond & P. Reich, 2007. Linking ecological theory with stream restoration. Freshwater Biology 52: 597–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Laliberté, E. & P. Legendre, 2010. A distance-based framework for measuring functional diversity from multiple traits. Ecology 91: 299–305.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Laliberté, E. & B. Shipley, 2011. FD: measuring functional diversity from multiple traits, and other tools for functional ecology. R package version 1.0-11.Google Scholar
  32. Lavorel, S., K. Grigulis, S. McIntyre, N. S. G. Williams, D. Garden, J. Dorrough, S. Berman, F. Quétier, A. Thébault & A. Bonis, 2008. Assessing functional diversity in the field—methodology matters! Functional Ecology 22: 134–147.Google Scholar
  33. Legendre, P. & L. Legendre, 1998. Numerical Ecology, 2nd English ed. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  34. Lindborg, R. & O. Eriksson, 2004. Historical landscape connectivity affects present plant species diversity. Ecology 85: 1840–1845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mahoney, J. & S. Rood, 1998. Streamflow requirements for cottonwood seedling recruitment—an integrative model. Wetlands 18: 634–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Malmqvist, B. & S. Rundle, 2002. Threats to the running water ecosystems of the world. Environmental Conservation 29: 134–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McIntyre, S., S. Lavorel & R. M. Tremont, 1995. Plant life-history attributes: their relationship to disturbance response in herbaceous vegetation. Journal of Ecology 83: 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Merritt, D. M. & E. E. Wohl, 2002. Processes governing hydrochory along rivers: hydraulics, hydrology, and dispersal phenology. Ecological Applications 12: 1071–1087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Merritt, D. M. & E. E. Wohl, 2006. Plant dispersal along rivers fragmented by dams. River Research and Applications 22: 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mitsch, W. J. & R. F. Wilson, 1996. Improving the success of wetland creation and restoration with know-how, time, and self-design. Ecological Applications 6: 77–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Muhar, S., K. Januschke, J. Kail, M. Poppe, D. Hering & A. D. Buijse, 2015. Evaluating good-practice cases for river restoration across Europe: context, methodological framework, selected results and recommendations. Hydrobiologia (this issue).Google Scholar
  42. Nilsson, C. & G. Grelsson, 1990. The effects of litter displacement on riverbank vegetation. Canadian Journal of Botany 68: 735–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nilsson, C., A. Ekblad, M. Dynesius, S. Backe, M. Gardfjell, B. Carlberg, S. Hellqviist & J. Roland, 1994. A comparison of species richness and traits of riparian plants between a main river channel and its tributaries. Journal of Ecology 82: 281–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nilsson, C., E. Andersson, D. M. Merritt & M. E. Johansson, 2002. Differences in riparian flora between riverbanks and river lakeshores explained by dispersal traits. Ecology 83: 2878–2887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nilsson, C., R. L. Brown, R. Jansson & D. M. Merritt, 2010. The role of hydrochory in structuring riparian and wetland vegetation. Biological Reviews 85: 837–858.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Nilsson, C., L. E. Polvi, J. Gardeström, E. M. Hasselquist, L. Lind & J. M. Sarneel, 2014. Riparian and in-stream restoration of boreal streams and rivers: success or failure? Ecohydrology. doi: 10.1002/eco.1480.Google Scholar
  47. Oberdorfer, E., 1992. Süddeutsche Pflanzengesellschaften. Teil I-III, Fischer, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  48. Oksanen, J., F. G. Blanchet, R. Kindt, P. Legendre, P. R. Minchin, R. B. O’Hara, G. L. Simpson, P. Solymos, M. H. H. Stevens & H. Wagner, 2014. Vegan: community ecology package. R package version 2.2-0. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan.
  49. Osenberg, C. W., O. Sarnelle & S. D. Cooper, 1997. Effect size in ecological experiments: the application of biological models in meta-analysis. American Naturalist 150: 799–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Palmer, M. A., R. F. Ambrose & N. L. Poff, 1997. Ecological theory and community restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 5: 291–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Palmer, M. A., H. L. Menninger & E. Bernhardt, 2010. River restoration, habitat heterogeneity and biodiversity: a failure of theory or practice? Freshwater Biology 55: 205–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Peres-Neto, P. R., P. Legendre, S. Dray & D. Borcard, 2006. Variation partitioning of species data matrices: estimation and comparison of fractions. Ecology 87: 2614–2625.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Pettit, N. E., R. H. Froend & P. M. Davies, 2001. Identifying the natural flow regime and the relationship with riparian vegetation for two contrasting western Australian rivers. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 17: 201–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 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
  55. Poff, N. L., J. D. Allan, M. B. Bain, J. R. Karr, K. L. Prestegaard, B. D. Richter, R. E. Sparks & J. C. Stromberg, 1997. The natural flow regime: a paradigm for river conservation and restoration. Bioscience 47: 769–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Raunkiaer, C., 1934. The Life Forms of Plants and Statistical Plant Geography. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  57. Renöfält, B. M., C. Nilsson & R. Jansson, 2005. Spatial and temporal patterns of species richness in a riparian landscape. Journal of Biogeography 32: 2025–2037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Trexler, J. C., 1995. Restoration of the Kissimmee River: a conceptual model of past and present fish communities and its consequences for evaluating restoration success. Restoration Ecology 3: 195–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Van der Maarel, E., 2007. Transformation of cover-abundance values for appropriate numerical treatment—alternatives to the proposals by Podani. Journal of Vegetation Science 18: 767–770.Google Scholar
  60. Van der Maarel, E. & J. Franklin, 2013. Vegetation Ecology, 2nd ed. Blackwell, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wang, Q., X. Yuan, J. H. M. Willison, Y. Zhang & H. Liu, 2014. Diversity and above-ground biomass patterns of vascular flora induced by flooding in the drawdown area of China’s Three Gorges Reservoir. PLoS One 9: e100889.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emma Göthe
    • 1
    Email author
  • Allan Timmermann
    • 1
  • Kathrin Januschke
    • 2
  • Annette Baattrup-Pedersen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BioscienceAarhus UniversitySilkeborgDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Aquatic EcologyUniversity of Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany

Personalised recommendations