Under pressure: assessment of chemical stress on restored river sections using effect‐based methods

IF 2.8 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Sarah Hörchner, Ariane Moulinec, Andrea Sundermann, Jörg Oehlmann, Matthias Oetken
{"title":"Under pressure: assessment of chemical stress on restored river sections using effect‐based methods","authors":"Sarah Hörchner, Ariane Moulinec, Andrea Sundermann, Jörg Oehlmann, Matthias Oetken","doi":"10.1111/rec.14206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aquatic ecosystems are affected by multiple stressors, including hydrological and morphological degradation, high nutrient loading, and chemical pollution. To improve freshwater habitats, hydromorphological restorations have been increasingly implemented. However, follow‐up assessments often show little to no improvement in ecological status, even years after restoration measures have been implemented. The success of restoration projects can be compromised by other stressors, such as insufficient water and sediment quality, which often receive less attention compared to nonchemical stressors. In this study, the impact of chemical stress on the outcome of five river restorations was evaluated ecologically, chemically, and ecotoxicologically. Overall, the habitat structure was considerably improved through the restoration measures, whereas the species communities did not show a consistent trend toward an improved ecological status. Effect‐based methods were used for an integrative assessment of the exposure to chemical mixtures in water and sediment samples of restored stream sections. Differences in toxicity between restored and non‐restored sections were found but did not show a consistent trend among the applied assays. In contrast, the chemical analysis showed that the sections of the same stream were similar in their chemical composition, and differences within a stream were primarily due to sediment contamination. The results of this study suggest that chemical pollution is a relevant factor preventing the success of restoration measures and, ultimately, the improvement of the ecological status of rivers. They also demonstrate the applicability of EBMs in water quality monitoring to detect mixture toxicity in streams and link chemical and ecological assessment.","PeriodicalId":54487,"journal":{"name":"Restoration Ecology","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Restoration Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.14206","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aquatic ecosystems are affected by multiple stressors, including hydrological and morphological degradation, high nutrient loading, and chemical pollution. To improve freshwater habitats, hydromorphological restorations have been increasingly implemented. However, follow‐up assessments often show little to no improvement in ecological status, even years after restoration measures have been implemented. The success of restoration projects can be compromised by other stressors, such as insufficient water and sediment quality, which often receive less attention compared to nonchemical stressors. In this study, the impact of chemical stress on the outcome of five river restorations was evaluated ecologically, chemically, and ecotoxicologically. Overall, the habitat structure was considerably improved through the restoration measures, whereas the species communities did not show a consistent trend toward an improved ecological status. Effect‐based methods were used for an integrative assessment of the exposure to chemical mixtures in water and sediment samples of restored stream sections. Differences in toxicity between restored and non‐restored sections were found but did not show a consistent trend among the applied assays. In contrast, the chemical analysis showed that the sections of the same stream were similar in their chemical composition, and differences within a stream were primarily due to sediment contamination. The results of this study suggest that chemical pollution is a relevant factor preventing the success of restoration measures and, ultimately, the improvement of the ecological status of rivers. They also demonstrate the applicability of EBMs in water quality monitoring to detect mixture toxicity in streams and link chemical and ecological assessment.
压力之下:利用基于效应的方法评估修复河段的化学压力
水生生态系统受到多重压力的影响,包括水文和形态退化、高营养负荷和化学污染。为了改善淡水生境,越来越多地实施了水文形态恢复措施。然而,后续评估往往表明,即使在恢复措施实施多年后,生态状况也几乎没有改善。修复项目的成功可能会受到其他压力因素的影响,如水质和沉积物质量不足,与非化学压力因素相比,水质和沉积物质量往往较少受到关注。本研究从生态学、化学和生态毒理学角度评估了化学压力对五条河流修复结果的影响。总体而言,修复措施大大改善了生境结构,但物种群落的生态状况并没有出现一致的改善趋势。采用基于效应的方法对修复河段的水和沉积物样本中的化学混合物暴露进行了综合评估。发现修复河段与未修复河段之间的毒性存在差异,但所采用的检测方法并没有显示出一致的趋势。相反,化学分析显示,同一条溪流的不同河段的化学成分相似,溪流内部的差异主要是由于沉积物污染造成的。这项研究的结果表明,化学污染是阻碍恢复措施取得成功并最终改善河流生态状况的相关因素。研究结果还证明了生态管理在水质监测中的适用性,可用于检测溪流中混合物的毒性,并将化学评估与生态评估联系起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Restoration Ecology
Restoration Ecology 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
15.60%
发文量
226
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: Restoration Ecology fosters the exchange of ideas among the many disciplines involved with ecological restoration. Addressing global concerns and communicating them to the international research community and restoration practitioners, the journal is at the forefront of a vital new direction in science, ecology, and policy. Original papers describe experimental, observational, and theoretical studies on terrestrial, marine, and freshwater systems, and are considered without taxonomic bias. Contributions span the natural sciences, including ecological and biological aspects, as well as the restoration of soil, air and water when set in an ecological context; and the social sciences, including cultural, philosophical, political, educational, economic and historical aspects. Edited by a distinguished panel, the journal continues to be a major conduit for researchers to publish their findings in the fight to not only halt ecological damage, but also to ultimately reverse it.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信