River ecosystem conceptual models and non-perennial rivers: A critical review.

Autor: Allen DC; Department of Biology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma., Datry T; INRAE, UR-RIVERLY, Centre de Lyon-Villeurbanne, Villeurbanne, CEDEX France., Boersma KS; Department of Biology, University of San Diego, San Diego, California., Bogan MT; School of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona., Boulton AJ; School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, Australia., Bruno D; Department of Biodiversity and Restoration, Pyrenean Institute of Ecology (IPE-CSIC), Zaragoza, Spain., Busch MH; Department of Biology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma., Costigan KH; School of Geosciences, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, Louisiana., Dodds WK; Division of Biology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas., Fritz KM; Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio., Godsey SE; Department of Geosciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho., Jones JB; Institute of Arctic Biology and Department of Biology and Wildlife, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, Alaska., Kaletova T; Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, Nitra, Slovakia., Kampf SK; Department of Ecosystem Science and Sustainability, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado., Mims MC; Department of Biological Sciences, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia., Neeson TM; Department of Geography and Environmental Sustainability, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma., Olden JD; School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.; Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University, Nathan, Queens Land, Australia., Pastor AV; CE3C, Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Changes, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal., Poff NL; Department of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.; Institute for Applied Ecology, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia., Ruddell BL; School of Informatics Computing and Cyber Systems, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona., Ruhi A; Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, California., Singer G; Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Berlin, Germany., Vezza P; Department of Environment, Land and Infrastructure Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Italy., Ward AS; O'Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana., Zimmer M; Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of California, Santa Cruz, California.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: WIREs. Water [WIREs Water] 2020 Aug 28; Vol. 7 (5).
Abstrakt: Conceptual models underpin river ecosystem research. However, current models focus on continuously flowing rivers and few explicitly address characteristics such as flow cessation and drying. The applicability of existing conceptual models to nonperennial rivers that cease to flow (intermittent rivers and ephemeral streams, IRES) has not been evaluated. We reviewed 18 models, finding that they collectively describe main drivers of biogeochemical and ecological patterns and processes longitudinally (upstream-downstream), laterally (channel-riparian-floodplain), vertically (surface water-groundwater), and temporally across local and landscape scales. However, perennial rivers are longitudinally continuous while IRES are longitudinally discontinuous. Whereas perennial rivers have bidirectional lateral connections between aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, in IRES, this connection is unidirectional for much of the time, from terrestrial-to-aquatic only. Vertical connectivity between surface and subsurface water occurs bidirectionally and is temporally consistent in perennial rivers. However, in IRES, this exchange is temporally variable, and can become unidirectional during drying or rewetting phases. Finally, drying adds another dimension of flow variation to be considered across temporal and spatial scales in IRES, much as flooding is considered as a temporally and spatially dynamic process in perennial rivers. Here, we focus on ways in which existing models could be modified to accommodate drying as a fundamental process that can alter these patterns and processes across spatial and temporal dimensions in streams. This perspective is needed to support river science and management in our era of rapid global change, including increasing duration, frequency, and occurrence of drying.
Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest The authors have declared no conflicts of interest for this article.
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje