Aquatic Sciences

, Volume 73, Issue 4, pp 499–511 | Cite as

Spatial variability in the hyporheic zone refugium of temporary streams

Recent Perspectives on Temporary River Ecology


A key ecological role hypothesized for the hyporheic zone is as a refugium that promotes survival of benthic invertebrates during adverse conditions in the surface stream. Many studies have investigated use of the hyporheic refugium during hydrological extremes (spates and streambed drying), and recent research has linked an increase in the abundance of benthic invertebrates within hyporheic sediments to increasing biotic interactions during flow recession in a temporary stream. This study examined spatial variability in the refugial capacity of the hyporheic zone in two groundwater-dominated streams in which flow permanence varied over small areas. Two non-insect taxa, Gammarus pulex and Polycelis spp. were common to both streams and were investigated in detail. Hydrological conditions in both streams comprised a four-month period of flow recession and low flows, accompanied by reductions in water depth and wetted width. Consequent declines in submerged benthic habitat availability were associated with increases in population densities of mobile benthic taxa, in particular G. pulex. The reduction in the spatial extent of the hyporheic zone was minimal, and this habitat was therefore a potential refugium from increasing biotic interactions in the benthic sediments. Concurrent increases in the hyporheic abundance and hyporheic proportion of a taxon’s total (benthic + hyporheic) population were considered as evidence of active refugium use. Such evidence was species-specific and site-specific, with refugium use being observed only for G. pulex and at sites dominated by downwelling water. A conceptual model of spatial variability in the refugial capacity of the hyporheic zone during habitat contraction is presented, which highlights the potential importance of the direction of hydrologic exchange.


Hyporheic refuge hypothesis Low flows Habitat contraction Hyporheos Benthos Gammarus 


  1. Belaidi N, Taleb A, Gagneur J (2004) Composition and dynamics of hyporheic and surface fauna in relation to the management of a polluted reservoir. Int J Lim 40:237–248. doi:10.1051/limn/2004020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bo T, Cucco M, Fenoglio S, Malacarne G (2006) Colonisation patterns and vertical movements of stream invertebrates in the interstitial zone: a case study in the Apennines, NW Italy. Hydrobiol 568:1573–5117. doi:10.1007/s10750-006-0025-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boulton AJ (1989) Over-summering refuges of aquatic macroinvertebrates in two intermittent streams in central Victoria. T Roy Soc South Aust 113:23–34Google Scholar
  4. Boulton AJ (2007) Field methods for monitoring surface/groundwater hydroecological interactions in aquatic systems. In: Wood PJ, Hannah DM, Sadler JP (eds) Hydroecology and ecohydrology past, present and future. Wiley, Chichester, pp 147–164Google Scholar
  5. Boulton AJ, Stanley EH (1995) Hyporheic processes during flooding and drying in a Sonoran Desert stream. II. Faunal dynamics. Arch Hydrobiol 134:27–52Google Scholar
  6. British Atmospheric Data Centre (BADC) (2009) Met Office—MIDAS land surface station data. British Atmospheric Data Centre. Accessed 14th Nov 2009
  7. Bunte K, Abt SR (2001) Sampling surface and subsurface particle size distributions in wadable gravel- and cobble-bed streams for analyses in sediment transport, hydraulics and streambed monitoring. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-74, Department of Agriculture Forest Service, United StatesGoogle Scholar
  8. Clinton SM, Grimm NB, Fisher SG (1996) Response of a hyporheic invertebrate assemblage to drying disturbance in a desert stream. J N Am Benthol Soc 15:700–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cooling MP, Boulton AJ (1993) Aspects of the hyporheic zone below the terminus of a South Australian arid-zone stream. Aust J Mar Fresh Res 44:411–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Covich AP, Crowl TA, Scatena FN (2003) Effects of extreme low flows on freshwater shrimps in a perennial tropical stream. Freshw Biol 48:1199–1206. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2427.2003.01093.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cowx IG, Young WO, Hellawell JM (1984) The influence of drought on the fish and invertebrate populations of an upland stream in Wales. Freshw Biol 14:165–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Crane M (1994) Population characteristics of Gammarus pulex (L.) from five English streams. Hydrobiol 281:91–100. doi:10.1007/BF00006438 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Datry T, Larned S, Scarsbrook M (2007) Responses of hyporheic invertebrate assemblages to large-scale variation in flow permanence and surface-subsurface exchange. Freshw Biol 52:1452–1462. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2007.01775.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Datry T, Lafont M, Larned ST (2010) Hyporheic annelid distribution along a flow permanence gradient in an alluvial river. Aquat Sci 72:335–346. doi:10.1007/s00027-010-0139-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davies PM (2010) Climate change implications for river restoration in global biodiversity hotspots. Restor Ecol 18:261–268. doi:10.1111/j.1526-100X.2009.00648.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davy-Bowker J, Sweeting W, Wright N, Clarke RT, Arnott S (2006) The distribution of benthic and hyporheic macroinvertebrates from the heads and tails of riffles. Hydrobiol 563:109–123. doi:10.1007/s10750-005-1482-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Del Rosario RB, Resh VH (2000) Invertebrates in intermittent and perennial streams: is the hyporheic zone a refuge from drying? J N Am Benthol Soc 19:680–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dewson ZS, Death RG, James ABW (2003) The effect of water abstractions on invertebrate communities in four small North Island streams. N Z Nat Sci 28:51–65. doi:10.1899/07-003R.1 Google Scholar
  19. Dick JTA (1995) The cannibalistic behaviour of two Gammarus species (Crustacea: Amphipoda). J Zool 236:697–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dole-Olivier M-J, Marmonier P, Beffy JL (1997) Response of invertebrates to lotic disturbance: is the hyporheic zone a patchy refugium? Freshw Biol 37:257–276. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2427.1997.00140.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Elser P (2001) Assessing small-scale directional movements of benthic invertebrates in streams by using a multidirectional cage trap. Limnologica 31:119–128. doi:10.1016/S0075-9511(01)80006-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fenoglio S, Bo T, Bosi G (2006) Deep interstitial habitat as a refuge for Agabus paludosus (Fabricus) (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae) during summer droughts. Coleopterists Bull 60:37–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fraser BG, Williams DD (1997) Accuracy and precision in sampling hyporheic fauna. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 54:1135–1141. doi:10.1139/cjfas-54-5-1135 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fritz KM, Dodds WK (2004) Resistance and resilience of macroinvertebrate assemblages to drying and flood in a tallgrass prairie stream system. Hydrobiol 527:99–112. doi:10.1023/B:HYDR.0000043188.53497.9B CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Graça MAS, Maltby L, Calow P (1993) Importance of fungi in the diet of Gammarus pulex and Asellus aquaticus. Oecologia 96:304–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Griffith MB, Perry SA (1993) The distribution of macroinvertebrates in the hyporheic zone of two small Appalachian headwater streams. Arch Hydrobiol 126:373–384Google Scholar
  27. Hancock PJ (2002) Human impacts on the stream–groundwater exchange zone. Environ Manage 29:763–781. doi:10.1007/s00267-001-0064-5 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hancock PJ (2006) The response of hyporheic invertebrate communities to a large flood in the Hunter River, New South Wales. Hydrobiol 568:255–262. doi:10.1007/s10750-006-0110-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Henry KS, Danielopol DL (1999) Oxygen dependent habitat selection in surface and hyporheic environments by Gammarus roeseli Gervais (Crustacea, Amphipoda): experimental evidence. Hydrobiol 390:51–60. doi:10.1023/A:1003541300460 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Holomuzki JR, Feminella JW, Power ME (2010) Biotic interactions in freshwater benthic habitats. J N Am Benthol Soc 29:220–244. doi:10.1899/08-044.1 Google Scholar
  31. Hynes HBN (1954) The occurrence of Gammarus duebeni Lilljeborg and its occurrence in fresh water in western Britain. J Anim Ecol 23:38–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. James ABW, Dewson ZS, Death RG (2008) Do stream macroinvertebrates use instream refugia in response to severe short-term flow reduction in New Zealand streams? Freshw Biol 53:1316–1334. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2008.01969.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kelly DW, Dick JTA, Montgomery WI (2002) The functional role of Gammarus (Crustacea: Amphipoda): shredders, predators, or both? Hydrobiol 485:199–203. doi:10.1023/A:1021370405349 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lancaster J, Belyea LR (1997) Nested hierarchies and scale-dependence of mechanisms of flow refugium use. J N Am Benthol Soc 16:221–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Larned ST, Datry T, Arscott DB, Tockner K (2010) Emerging concepts in temporary-river ecology. Freshw Biol 55:717–738. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02322.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Maddock I, Petts G, Bickerton M (1995) River channel assessment—a method for defining channel sectors on the River Glen, Lincolnshire, UK. In: Proceedings of Boulder symposium, July 1995. IAHS Publication no., vol 230. pp 219–226Google Scholar
  37. Maltby L (1995) Sensitivity of the crustaceans Gammarus pulex (L.) and Asellus aquaticus (L.) to short-term exposure to hypoxia and unionized ammonia: observations and possible mechanisms. Wat Res 29:781–787. doi:10.1016/0043-1354(94)00231-U CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Maridet L, Philippe M (1995) Influence of substrate characteristics on the vertical distribution of stream macroinvertebrates in the hyporheic zone. Folia Fac Sci Nat Univ Masarykianae Brunensis Biologia 21:101–105Google Scholar
  39. McGrath KE, Peeters ETHM, Beijer JAJ, Scheffer M (2007) Habitat-mediated cannibalism and microhabitat restriction in the stream invertebrate Gammarus pulex. Hydrobiol 589:155–164. doi:10.1007/s10750-007-0731-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Met Office (2009) Eastern England: climate Met Office. Accessed 16th Oct 2009
  41. Mortensen E (1982) Production of Gammarus pulex L. (Amphipoda) in a small Danish stream. Hydrobiol 87:77–82. doi:10.1007/BF00016664 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Olsen DA, Townsend CR (2005) Flood effects on invertebrates, sediments and particulate organic matter in the hyporheic zone of a gravel-bed stream. Freshw Biol 50:839–853. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2005.01365.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Orghidan T (1959) Ein neuer lebensraum des unterirdischen wassers, der hyporheische biotope. Arch Hydrobiol 55:392–414Google Scholar
  44. Orghidan T (2010) A new habitat of subsurface waters: the hyporheic biotope. Fund Appl Limnol 176:291–302. doi:10.1127/1863-9135/2010/0176-0291 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Palmer MA (1993) Experimentation in the hyporheic zone: challenges and prospectus. J N Am Benthol Soc 12:84–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Puig MA, Sabater F, Malo J (1990) Benthic and hyporheic faunas of mayflies and stoneflies in the Ter river basin (NE-Spain). In: Campbell IC (ed) Mayflies and stoneflies: life histories and biology. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 255–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rada B, Puljas S (2010) Do karst rivers “deserve” their own biotic index? A ten year study on macrozoobenthos in Croatia. Int J Speleol 39:137–147Google Scholar
  48. Reynoldson TB (1981) The ecology of the Turbellaria with special reference to the freshwater triclads. Hydrobiol 84:87–90. doi:10.1007/BF00026166 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rice S (1995) The spatial variation and routine sampling of spawning gravels in small coastal streams. British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Victoria, British Columbia. Working Paper 06/1995Google Scholar
  50. Richards C, Bacon KL (1994) Influence of fine sediment on macroinvertebrate colonization of surface and hyporheic stream substrates. West N Am Naturalist 54:106–113Google Scholar
  51. Robertson AL, Wood PJ (2010) Ecology of the hyporheic zone: origins, current knowledge and future directions. Fund Appl Limnol 176:279–289. doi:10.1127/1863-9135/2010/0176-0279 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Russier-Delolme R (1974) A comparative study of the tolerance of two freshwater planarians, Dugesia tigrina and Polycelis felina, to low oxygen levels. Int J Lim 10:311–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Savage AA (1996) Density dependent and density independent relationships during a twenty-seven year study of the population dynamics of the benthic macroinvertebrate community of a chemically unstable lake. Hydrobiol 335:115–131. doi:10.1007/BF00015273 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Scarsbrook MR, Halliday J (2002) Detecting patterns in hyporheic community structure: does sampling method alter the story? New Zeal J Mar Fresh 36:443–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Smock LA, Smith LC, Jones JB Jr, Hooper SM (1994) Effects of drought and a hurricane on a coastal headwater stream. Arch Hydrobiol 131:25–38Google Scholar
  56. Strayer DL, May SE, Nielsen P, Wollheim W, Hausam S (1997) Oxygen, organic matter and sediment granulometry as controls on hyporheic animal communities. Arch Hydrobiol 140:131–144Google Scholar
  57. Stubbington R, Wood PJ, Boulton AJ (2009a) Low flow controls on benthic and hyporheic macroinvertebrate assemblages during supra-seasonal drought. Hydrol Process 23:2252–2263. doi:10.1002/hyp.7290 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Stubbington R, Greenwood AM, Wood PJ, Armitage PD, Gunn J, Robertson AL (2009b) The response of perennial and temporary headwater stream invertebrate communities to hydrological extremes. Hydrobiol 630:299–312. doi:10.1007/s10750-009-9823-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Stubbington R, Wood PJ, Reid I, Gunn, J (2011) Benthic and hyporheic invertebrate community responses to seasonal flow recession in a groundwater-dominated stream. Ecohydrology (early view) 4. doi:10.1002/eco.168
  60. Wagner FH, Bretschko G (2002) Interstitial flow through preferential flow paths in the hyporheic zone of the Oberer Seeback, Austria. Aquat Sci 64:307–316. doi:10.1007/s00027-002-8075-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ward PI (1986) A comparative field study of the breeding behaviour of a stream and a pond population of Gammarus pulex (Amphipoda). Oikos 46:29–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Weigelhofer G, Waringer J (2003) Vertical distribution of benthic macroinvertebrates in riffles versus deep runs with differing contents of fine sediments (Weidlingbach, Austria). Int Rev Hydrobiol 88:304–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Whitfield-Gibbons J, Andrews KM (2004) PIT tagging: simple technology at its best. Bioscience 54:447–454. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[0447:PTSTAI]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Williams DD, Hynes HBN (1974) The occurrence of benthos deep in the substratum of a stream. Freshw Biol 4:233–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Winemiller KO, Flecker AS, Hoeinghaus DJ (2010) Patch dynamics and environmental heterogeneity in lotic ecosystems. J N Am Benthol Soc 29:84–99. doi:10.1899/08-048.1 Google Scholar
  66. Wood PJ, Gunn J, Smith H, Abas-Kutty A (2005) Flow permanence and macroinvertebrate community diversity within groundwater dominated headwater streams and springs. Hydrobiol 545:55–64. doi:10.1007/s10750-005-2213-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wood PJ, Boulton AJ, Little S, Stubbington R (2010) Is the hyporheic zone a refugium for macroinvertebrates during severe low flow conditions? Fund Appl Limnol 176:377–390. doi:10.1127/1863-9135/2010/0176-0377 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Basel AG 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Science and TechnologyNottingham Trent UniversityNottinghamUK
  2. 2.Department of GeographyLoughborough UniversityLoughboroughUK

Personalised recommendations