Advertisement

Hydrobiologia

, Volume 769, Issue 1, pp 1–2 | Cite as

Preface: Effects of hydromorphological river restoration—a comprehensive field investigation of 20 European projects

  • Jochem KailEmail author
  • Brendan McKie
  • Piet F. M. Verdonschot
  • Daniel Hering
RIVER RESTORATION EFFECTS

All over Europe, river stretches are being restored to achieve “good ecological status” or “good ecological potential,” the targets of the EU Water Framework Directive. Hydromorphological restoration is one of the most frequently applied methods, including re-meandering, widening, and the re-connection of river and floodplain. While there is a multitude of individual studies on the effects of hydromorphological restoration on individual species or taxa, comprehensive investigations comparing the effects of restoration on different organism groups are scarce. The available studies, however, imply that restoration often has little effects, in particular on benthic invertebrates, fish, and aquatic macrophytes. The reasons are obscure; one possible cause is that predominantly very short river stretches are being restored, which might not be sufficient to initiate geomorphic processes and support populations of aquatic species.

Within the EU-funded project Restoring rivers FOR effective catchment Management (REFORM), an international team of scientists has addressed this question, by studying twenty restored river stretches in ten European catchments, always in comparison to a nearby non-restored stretch of the same river. Ten of the restored river sections represented a major restoration effort and a comparatively long restored river stretch, while the other ten restored sections were shorter. An overview was published by Hering et al., (2015).

The special issue gives insight in the details of the study. Muhar et al. (2016) provide background information on the study’s setup and the individual restoration measures and transfers the overall results into recommendations for water management. The other papers report on the detailed results for the individual parameters and organism groups studied: Hydromorphology (Poppe et al., 2016), aquatic macrophytes (Ecke et al., 2016), benthic invertebrates (Verdonschot et al., 2016), fish (Schmutz et al., 2016), floodplain vegetation (Göthe et al., 2016), riparian ground beetles (Januschke & Verdonschot, 2016), food webs (Kupilas et al., 2016), and ecosystem services (Vermaat et al., 2016).

Notes

Acknowledgments

All papers of the special issue result from the EU-funded project REFORM (Restoring rivers FOR effective catchment Management), European Union’s Seventh Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under Grant Agreement No. 282656. We are grateful to all the scientists who have performed the field investigations on which the special issues are based. We further would like to thank the scientists, who acted as reviewers for the special issue. Finally, we would like to express our deep gratitude to Tom Buijse for the coordination of REFORM.

References

  1. Ecke, F., S. Hellsten, J. Köhler, A. W. Lorenz, J. Rääpysjärvi, S. Scheunig, J. Segersten & A. Baattrup-Pedersen, 2016. The response of hydrophyte growth forms and plant strategies to river restoration. Hydrobiologia. doi: 10.1007/s10750-015-2605-6.Google Scholar
  2. Göthe, E., A. Timmermann, K. Januschke & A. Baattrup-Pedersen, 2016. Structural and functional responses of floodplain vegetation to stream ecosystem restoration. Hydrobiologia. doi: 10.1007/s10750-015-2401-3.Google Scholar
  3. Hering, D., J. Aroviita, A. Baattrup-Pedersen, K. Brabec, T. Buijse, F. Ecke, N. Friberg, M. Gielczewski, K. Januschke, J. Köhler, B. Kupilas, A. W. Lorenz, S. Muhar, A. Paillex, M. Poppe, T. Schmidt, S. Schmutz, J. Vermaat, P. F. M. Verdonschot, R. C. M. Verdonschot, C. Wolter & J. Kail, 2015. Contrasting the roles of section length and instream habitat enhancement for river restoration success: a field study on 20 European restoration projects. Journal of Applied Ecology 52: 1518–1527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Januschke, K. & R. C. M. Verdonschot, 2016. Effects of river restoration on riparian ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in Europe. Hydrobiologia. doi: 10.1007/s10750-015-2532-6.Google Scholar
  5. Kupilas, B., N. Friberg, B. G. McKie, M. A. Jochmann, A. W. Lorenz & D. Hering, 2016. River restoration and the trophic structure of benthic invertebrate communities across 16 European restoration projects. Hydrobiologia. doi: 10.1007/s10750-015-2569-6.Google Scholar
  6. Muhar, S., K. Januschke, J. Kail, M. Poppe, S. Schmutz, D. Hering & A. D. Buijse, 2016. Evaluating good-practice cases for river restoration across Europe: context, methodological framework, selected results and recommendations. Hydrobiologia. doi: 10.1007/s10750-016-2652-7.Google Scholar
  7. Poppe, M., J. Kail, J. Aroviita, M. Stelmaszczyk, M. Giełczewski & S. Muhar, 2016. Assessing restoration effects on hydromorphology in European mid-sized rivers by key hydromorphological parameters. Hydrobiologia. doi: 10.1007/s10750-015-2468-x.Google Scholar
  8. Schmutz, S., P. Jurajda, S. Kaufmann, A. W. Lorenz, S. Muhar, A. Paillex, M. Poppe & C. Wolter, 2016. Response of fish assemblages to hydromorphological restoration in central and northern European rivers. Hydrobiologia. doi: 10.1007/s10750-015-2354-6.Google Scholar
  9. Verdonschot, R. C. M., J. Kail, B. G. McKie & P. F. M. Verdonschot, 2016. The role of benthic microhabitats in determining the effects of hydromorphological river restoration on macroinvertebrates. Hydrobiologia. doi: 10.1007/s10750-015-2575-8.Google Scholar
  10. Vermaat, J., A. J. Wagtendonk, R. Brouwer, O. Sheremet, E. Ansink, T. Brockhoff, M. Plug, S. Hellsten, J. Aroviita, L. Tylec, M. Gielczewski, L. Kohut, K. Brabec, J. Haverkamp, M. Poppe, K. Boeck, M. Coerssen, J. Segersten & D. Hering, 2016. Assessing the societal benefits of river restoration using the ecosystem services approach. Hydrobiologia. doi: 10.1007/s10750-015-2482-z.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jochem Kail
    • 1
    Email author
  • Brendan McKie
    • 2
  • Piet F. M. Verdonschot
    • 3
  • Daniel Hering
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Aquatic EcologyUniversity of Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Aquatic Sciences and AssessmentSwedish University of Agricultural SciencesUppsalaSweden
  3. 3.Freshwater Ecology, AlterraWageningen URWageningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations