Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Restoration effects on germination and survival of plants in the riparian zone: a phytometer study

  • Published:
Plant Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many streams that were channelized to facilitate timber floating in northern Sweden, have in recent years been restored by returning coarse sediment (cobbles and boulders) to the channel and reconnecting riparian with instream habitats. We asked if such restoration measures affect germination and survival of plants in the riparian zone, and if such potential effects depend on location in the catchment. We used a paired site approach, comparing the performance of Helianthus annuus (sunflower) phytometers (seeds and seedlings) in the riparian zone in channelized versus restored river reaches along climate and stream size gradients in the Vindel River catchment in northern Sweden. Phytometer survival, substrate availability, and soil nutrient content in large streams were enhanced by restoration, but overall, phytometer performance was negatively related to the length of the growing season, i.e. phytometers grew best at high altitudes and short growing seasons. This result may have been caused by less competition from the shorter and sparser neighbouring vegetation at these sites or to more frequent flooding events, enhancing retention of organic matter. Soil nutrient levels were lowest close to the coast and in large streams, probably due to deposition of mineral sediment. The higher availability of riparian habitat at restored than at channelized sites suggests that plant species richness and abundance may potentially increase after restoration. Seedling transplantation seems to be a preferable revegetation measure, because phytometer seedlings established better than seeds and survival was significantly higher at restored sites. The good plant performance at sites with short growing seasons and high altitudes suggests that, with limited resources, restoration measures should first be located to such sites.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andersson E, Nilsson C, Johansson ME (2000) Plant dispersal in boreal rivers and its relation to the diversity of riparian flora. J Biogeogr 27:1095–1106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ångström A (1974) Sveriges klimat, 3rd edn. Generalstabens Litografiska Anstalts Förlag, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • Arthington AH, Bunn SE, Poff NL, Naiman RJ (2006) The challenge of providing environmental flow rules to sustain river ecosystems. Ecol Appl 16:1311–1318

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker ES, Sarneel JM, Gulati RD, Lui Z, van Donk E (2012) Restoring macrophyte diversity in shallow temperate lakes: biotic versus abiotic constraints. Hydrobiologia 710:23–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balke T, Herman PMJ, Bouma TJ (2014) Critical transitions in disturbance-driven ecosystems: identifying Windows of Opportunity for recovery. J Ecol 102:700–708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bejarano MD, Marchamalo M, Garcia de Jalon D (2010) Flow regime patterns and their controlling factors in the Ebro basin (Spain). J Hydrol 385:323–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernhardt ES, Palmer MA, Allan JD, Alexander G, Barnas K, Brooks S, Carr J, Clayton S, Dahm C, Follstad-Shah J, Galat D, Gloss S, Goodwin P, Hart D, Hassett B, Jenkinson R, Katz S, Kondolf GM, Lake PS, Lave R, Meyer JL, O’Donnell TK, Pagano L, Powell B, Sudduth E (2005) Ecology: synthesizing US river restoration efforts. Science 308:636–637

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brookes A (1997) Restoring the sinuosity of artificially straightened stream channels. Environ Geol Water Sci 10:33–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burmeier S, Eckstein RL, Otte A, Donath TW (2010) Desiccation cracks act as natural seed traps in flood–meadow systems. Plant Soil 333:351–364

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Catford JA, Daehler CC, Murphy HT, Sheppard AW, Hardesty BD, Westcott DA, Rejmánek M, Bellingham PJ, Pergl J, Horvitz CC, Hulme PE (2012) The intermediate disturbance hypothesis and plant invasions: implications for species richness and management. Perspect Plant Ecol 14:231–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clements FE, Goldsmith GW (1924) The phytometer method in ecology: the plant and community as instruments. Carnegie Institution, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietrich AL, Nilsson C, Jansson R (2013) Phytometers are underutilised for evaluating ecological restoration. Basic Appl Ecol 14:369–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietrich AL, Lind L, Nilsson C, Jansson R (2014) The use of phytometers for evaluating restoration effects on riparian soil fertility. J Environ Qual 43:1916–1925

  • Dudgeon D, Arthington AH, Gessner MO, Kawabata ZI, Knowler DJ, Leveque C, Naiman RJ, Prieur-Richard AH, Soto D, Stiassny MLJ, Sullivan CA (2006) Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biol Rev 81:163–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of October the 23rd Establishing a Framework for Community Action in the Field of Water Policy. Official Journal of the European Communities, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Feld CK, Birk S, Bradley DC, Hering D, Kail J, Marzin A, Melcher A, Nemitz D, Pedersen ML, Pletterbauer F, Pont D, Verdonschot PFM, Friberg N (2011) From natural to degraded rivers and back again: a test of restoration ecology theory and practice. Adv Ecol Res 44:119–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florsheim JL, Mount JF, Chin A (2008) Bank erosion as a desirable attribute of rivers. Bioscience 58:519–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardeström J, Holmqvist D, Polvi LE, Nilsson C (2013) Demonstration restoration measures in tributaries of the Vindel River catchment. Ecol Soc 18(3):8. doi:10.5751/ES-05609-180308

    Google Scholar 

  • Geurts JJM, van de Wouw PAG, Smolders AJP, Roelofs JGM, Lamers LPM (2011) Ecological restoration on former agricultural soils: feasibility of in situ phosphate fixation as an alternative to top soil removal. Ecol Eng 37:1620–1629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson DJ (2002) Methods in comparative plant population ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Hald AB, Nielsen AL, Debosz K, Badsberg JH (2003) Restoration of degraded low-lying grasslands: indicators of the environmental potential of botanical nature quality. Ecol Eng 21:1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart DD, Johnson TE, Bushaw-Newton KL, Horwitz RJ, Bednarek AT, Charles DF, Kreeger DA, Velinsky DJ (2002) Dam removal: challenges and opportunities for ecological research and river restoration. Bioscience 52:669–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helfield JM, Capon SJ, Nilsson C, Jansson R, Palm D (2007) Restoration of rivers used for timber floating: effects on riparian plant diversity. Ecol Appl 17:840–851

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Helfield JM, Engström J, Michel JT, Nilsson C, Jansson R (2012) Effects of river restoration on riparian biodiversity in secondary channels of the Pite River, Sweden. Environ Manag 49:130–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann WA, Poorter H (2002) Avoiding bias in calculations of relative growth rate. Ann Bot 90:37–42

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hough-Snee N, Roper BB, Wheaton JM, Budy P, Lokteff RL (2013) Riparian vegetation communities change rapidly following passive restoration at a northern Utah stream. Ecol Eng 58:371–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isselstein J, Tallowin JRB, Smith REN (2002) Factors affecting seed germination and seedling establishment of fen-meadow species. Restor Ecol 10:173–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iversen TM, Kronvang B, Madsen BL, Markmann P, Nielsen MB (1993) Reestablishment of Danish streams: restoration and maintenance measures. Aquat Conserv 3:73–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaase CT, Kat GK (2012) Effects of stream restoration on woody riparian vegetation of southern Appalachian Mountain streams, North Carolina, U.S.A. Restor Ecol 20:647–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman JB, Beschta RL, Otting N, Lytjen D (1997) An ecological perspective of riparian and stream restoration in the Western United States. Fisheries 22:12–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladefoged TN, Stevenson CM, Haoa S, Mulrooney M, Pulestone C, Vitousek PM, Chadwick OA (2010) Soil nutrient analysis of Rapa Nui gardening. Archaeol Ocean 45:80–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leicht-Young SA, Silander JA Jr, Latimer AM (2007) Comparative performance of invasive and native Celastrus species across environmental gradients. Oecologia 154:273–282

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lennox MS, Lewis DJ, Jackson RD, Harper J, Larson S, Tate KW (2011) Development of vegetation and aquatic habitat in restored riparian sites of California’s north coast rangelands. Restor Ecol 19:225–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maddock I (1999) The importance of physical habitat assessment for evaluating river health. Freshw Biol 41:373–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malmqvist B, Rundle S (2002) Threats to the running water ecosystems of the world. Environ Conserv 29:134–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer CK, Whiles MR, Baer SG (2010) Plant community recovery following restoration in temporally variable riparian wetlands. Restor Ecol 18:52–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muotka T, Syrjänen J (2007) Changes in habitat structure, benthic invertebrate diversity, trout populations and ecosystem processes in restored forest streams: a boreal perspective. Freshw Biol 52:724–737

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naiman RJ, Décamps H, Pollock M (1993) The role of riparian corridors in maintaining regional biodiversity. Ecol Appl 3:209–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naiman RJ, Bunn SE, Nilsson C, Petts GE, Pinay G, Thompson LC (2002) Legitimizing fluvial ecosystems as users of water: an overview. Environ Manag 30:455–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura F, Ishiyama N, Sueyoshi M, Negishi JN, Akasaka T (2014) The significance of meander restoration for the hydrogeomorphology and recovery of wetland organisms in the Kushiro River, a lowland river in Japan. Restor Ecol 22:544–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson C, Ekblad A, Dynesius M, Backe S, Gardfjell M, Carlberg B, Hellqvist S, Jansson R (1994) A comparison of species richness and traits of riparian plants between a main river channel and its tributaries. J Ecol 82:281–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson C, Lepori F, Malmqvist B, Törnlund E, Hjerdt N, Helfield JM, Palm D, Östergren J, Jansson R, Brännäs E, Lundqvist H (2005a) Forecasting environmental responses to restoration of rivers used as log floatways: an interdisciplinary challenge. Ecosystems 8:779–800

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson C, Reidy CA, Dynesius M, Revenga C (2005b) Fragmentation and flow regulation of the world’s large river systems. Science 308:405–408

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson C, Brown RL, Jansson R, Merritt DM (2010) The role of hydrochory in structuring riparian and wetland vegetation. Biol Rev 85:837–858

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson C, Polvi LE, Gardeström J, Hasselquist EM, Lind L, Sarneel J (2015) Riparian and instream restoration of boreal streams and rivers: success or failure? Ecohydrology (in press)

  • O’Dowd DJ, Gill AM (1984) Predator satiation and site alteration following fire: mass reproduction of alpine ash (Eucalyptus delegatensis) in southeastern Australia. Ecology 65:1052–1066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MA, Bernhardt ES, Allan JD, Lake PS, Alexander G, Brooks S, Carr J, Clayton S, Dahm CN, Shah JF, Galat DL, Loss SG, Goodwin P, Hart DD, Hassett B, Jenkinson R, Kondolf GM, Lave R, Meyer JL, O’Donnell TK, Pagano L, Sudduth E (2005) Standards for ecologically successful river restoration. J Appl Ecol 42:208–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer MA, Filoso S, Fanelli RM (2014) From ecosystems to ecosystem services: stream restoration as ecological engineering. Ecol Eng 65:62–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poff NL, Matthews JH (2013) Environmental flows in the Anthropocene: past progress and future prospects. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 5:667–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2011) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 20 Jan 2015

  • Renöfält BM, Jansson R, Nilsson C (2005) Spatial patterns of plant invasiveness in a riparian corridor. Landsc Ecol 20:165–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruwanza S, Gaertner M, Esler KJ, Richardson DM (2013) Both complete clearing and thinning of invasive trees lead to short-term recovery of native riparian vegetation in the Western Cape, South Africa. Appl Veg Sci 16:193–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders S, McGraw JB (2005) Hydrastis canadensis L. (Ranunculaceae) distribution does not reflect response to microclimate gradients across a mesophytic forest cove. Plant Ecol 181:279–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SER (2004) The SER international primer on ecological restoration. Society for Ecological Restoration International, Science and Policy Working Group. http://www.ser.org/docs/default-document-library/english.pdf. Accessed 20 Jan 2015

  • Stanford JA, Ward JV, Liss WJ, Frissell CA, Williams RN, Lichatowich JA, Coutant CC (1995) A general protocol for restoration of regulated rivers. Regul Rivers Res Manag 12:391–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanley EH, Doyle MW (2003) Trading off: the ecological effects of dam removal. Front Ecol Environ 1:15–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sudduth EB, Meyer JL, Bernhardt ES (2007) Stream restoration practices in the southeastern United States. Restor Ecol 15:573–583

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sundborg Å, Elfström Å, Rudberg S (1980) Piteälven, Laisälven och Vindelälven. Naturförhållanden och miljöeffekter vid vattenöverledning. UNGI Report No. 51. Uppsala University, Uppsala

  • Sundermann A, Stoll S, Haase P (2011) River restoration success depends on the species pool of the immediate surroundings. Ecol Appl 21:1962–1971

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sveriges Nationalatlas (1995) Klimat, sjöar och vattendrag. Bra Böcker, Höganäs

    Google Scholar 

  • Tallowin JRB, Smith REN (2001) Restoration of a Cirsio–Molinietum fen meadow on an agriculturally improved pasture. Restor Ecol 9:167–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Törnlund E, Östlund L (2002) Floating of timber in northern Sweden: the construction of floatways and transformation of rivers. Environ Hist 8:85–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tullos DD, Penrose DL, Jennings GD, Cope WG (2009) Analysis of functional traits in reconfigured channels: implications for the bioassessment and disturbance of river restoration. J N Am Benthol Soc 28:80–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Loon AH, Soomers H, Schot PP, Bierkens MFP, Griffioen J, Wassen MJ (2011) Linking habitat suitability and seed dispersal model in order to analyze the effectiveness of hydrological fen restoration strategies. Biol Conserv 144:1025–1035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vander Mijnsbrugge K, Bischoff A, Smith B (2010) A question of origin: where and how to collect seed for ecological restoration. Basic Appl Ecol 11:300–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Violle C, Castro H, Richarte J, Navas ML (2009) Intraspecific seed trait variations and competition: passive or adaptive response? Funct Ecol 23:612–620

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox AC, O’Connor JE, Major JJ (2014) Rapid reservoir erosion, hyperconcentrated flow, and downstream deposition triggered by breaching of 38 m tall Condit Dam, White Salmon River, Washington. J Geophys Res 119:1376–1394

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Javier Segura and Patrik Bylund for assistance in the field, Johan Rydberg for laboratory assistance and Lenka Kuglerová for statistical help and comments on the manuscript. Funding was provided by the Swedish Research Council Formas (to CN).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Landscape Ecology Group, Department of Ecology and Environmental Science, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden

    Anna L. Dietrich, Christer Nilsson & Roland Jansson

Authors
  1. Anna L. Dietrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christer Nilsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Roland Jansson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christer Nilsson.

Additional information

Communicated by Shayne Martin Jacobs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dietrich, A.L., Nilsson, C. & Jansson, R. Restoration effects on germination and survival of plants in the riparian zone: a phytometer study. Plant Ecol 216, 465–477 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-015-0450-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-015-0450-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation