Numerous physical, chemical, and biological processes interact to produce a stream ecosystem. Small streams tend to reflect the conditions of the drainage area and usually are chemically and physically dynamic and biologically rich.
In this exercise we will attempt to observe various properties of a small stream ecosystem. By measuring and integrating some of the major physical and biological components of the energy and nutrient budgets (energy and mass balances) during a 24-h period, it will be possible to evaluate aspects of the functional role of streams within the landscape as a whole. We will be interested in the fate of solar radiation as it enters the ecosystem, how much is used to heat the water, how much potential energy is lost as water flows downhill, how much of the solar energy is utilized by plant photosynthesis in the stream and converted to stored chemical energy, and how much of the stored chemical energy is used by various components of the stream ecosystem. Some attention also will be given to the flux of nutrients through the stream ecosystem.
Small steams provide excellent opportunities for such studies. Sampling can be done relatively efficiently and inexpensively. In addition to the techniques and approaches discussed below, see Odum (1957), Teal (1957), Minckley (1963), Hall (1972), Manny and Wetzel (1973), and Fisher and Likens (1973) for further information about such studies of stream and spring ecosystems.
Dissolve Oxygen Ecosystem Respiration Diurnal Change Downstream Site Stream Ecosystem
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Burton, T.M. and G.E. Likens. 1973. The effect of strip-cutting on stream temperatures in the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest, New Hampshire. BioScience 23(7):433–435.Google Scholar
Eaton, J.S., G.E. Likens, and F.H. Bormann. 1969. Use of membrane filters in gravimetric analyses of particulate matter in natural waters. Wat. Resour. Res. 5(5):1151–1156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, S.G. and G.E. Likens. 1973. Energy flow in Bear Brook, New Hampshire: An integrative approach to stream ecosystem metabolism. Ecol. Monogr. 43(4):421–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallegos, C.L., G.M. Hornberger, and M.G. Kelly. 1977. A model of river benthic algal photosynthesis in response to rapid changes in light. Limnol. Oceanogr. 22:226–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, C.A.S. 1972. Migration and metabolism in a temperate stream ecosystem. Ecology 53:585–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, C.A.S. and R. Moll. 1975. Methods of assessing aquatic primary productivity, pp. 19–53. In:H. Lieth and R.H. Whittaker, Editors. Primary Productivity of the Biosphere. Springer-Verlag, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, M.G., G.M. Hornberger, and B.J. Cosby. 1974. Continuous automated measurement of rates of photosynthesis and respiration in an undisturbed river community. Limnol. Oceanogr. 19:305–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Likens, G.E., F.H. Bormann, R.S. Pierce, J.S. Eaton, and N.M. Johnson. 1977. Biogeochemistry of a Forested Ecosystem. Springer-Verlag, New York. 146 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manny, B.A. and R.G. Wetzel, 1973. Diurnal changes in dissolved organic and inorganic carbon and nitrogen in a hardwater stream. Freshwat. Biol. 3:31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marzolf, E.R., P.J. Mulholland, and A.D. Steinman. 1994. Improvements to the diurnal upstream-downstream dissolved oxygen change technique of determining whole-stream metabolism in small streams. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 51:1591–1599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minckley, W.L. 1963. The ecology of a spring stream, Doe Run, Meade County, Kentucky. Wildl. Monogr. 11:124 pp.Google Scholar
Odum, H.T. 1957. Trophic structure and productivity of Silver Springs, Florida. Ecol. Monogr. 27:55–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owens, M. 1969. Some factors involved in the use of dissolved-oxygen distributions in streams to determine productivity, pp. 209–224. In:CR. Goldman, Editor. Primary Productivity in Aquatic Environments. Univ. California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Teal, J.M. 1957. Community metabolism in a temperate cold spring. Ecol. Monogr. 27:283–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wetzel, R.G. 1975. Primary production, pp. 230–247. In:B.A. Whitton, Editor. River Ecology. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
Wetzel, R.G. and B.A. Manny. 1977. Seasonal changes in particulate and dissolved organic carbon and nitrogen in a hardwater stream. Arch. Hydrobiol. 80:20–39.Google Scholar
Wetzel, R.G. and A. Otsuki. 1974. Allochthonous organic carbon of a marl lake. Arch. Hydrobiol. 73:31–56.Google Scholar
Wetzel, R.G. and A.K. Ward. 1992. Primary production, pp. 354–369. In:P. Calow and G.E. Petts, Editors. Rivers Handbook. I. Hydrological and Ecological Principles. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.Google Scholar
Wright, J.C. and R.M. Horrall. 1967. Heat budget studies on the Madison River, Yellowstone National Park. Limnol. Oceanogr. 12(4):578–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, R.G. and A.D. Huryn. 1998. Comment: Improvements to the diurnal upstream-downstream dissolved oxygen change technique for determining whole-stream metabolism in small streams. Can. J. Fish Aquat. Sci. 55:1784–1785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar