在缺乏木质河岸植被的低坡度河道上,河流和河岸对海狸坝类似物的多年响应轨迹

IF 2.8 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Matthew R. Orr, Nicholas P. Weber, Ron J. Reuter, S. Herzog, Heather M. Broughton, Samantha Bango
{"title":"在缺乏木质河岸植被的低坡度河道上,河流和河岸对海狸坝类似物的多年响应轨迹","authors":"Matthew R. Orr, Nicholas P. Weber, Ron J. Reuter, S. Herzog, Heather M. Broughton, Samantha Bango","doi":"10.1111/rec.14223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Beaver‐based restoration techniques seek to assist with the recovery of stream systems that have been damaged, degraded, or destroyed. In addition to reintroducing beaver, restoration practitioners have sought to mimic the influence of beaver dams on stream processes by building beaver dam analogs (BDAs). Stream restoration has been criticized for a lack of extended monitoring and a dearth of empirical evidence for the efficacy of BDAs. Here, we extend early and previously reported 1‐ to 2‐year monitoring of five BDAs on a low‐gradient stream lacking woody riparian vegetation to 3–6 years, depending on the parameter examined. BDAs raised groundwater near the stream and did not affect water temperatures during the duration of monitoring. Consistent with elevated groundwater levels, riparian willow cuttings grew 2.8–9.6 times more when planted near BDAs than far from BDAs, which was more than the 1.3‐ to 1.4‐fold difference after the first growing season. In contrast, a short‐term association between BDAs and willow survival disappeared in the long term. Likewise, sediment aggradation above the upstream BDA 1 year after construction reversed completely 4 years later, probably due to structural damage during high flows that could not be repaired until flows abated. Annual peak flow levels explained over 80% of the variation in the number of structures requiring annual repair. Our results suggest that BDA‐based restoration should account for both the costs of structure maintenance during project planning and the importance of long‐term monitoring during project assessment.","PeriodicalId":54487,"journal":{"name":"Restoration Ecology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multiyear trajectories of stream and riparian responses to beaver dam analogs on a low‐gradient channel lacking woody riparian vegetation\",\"authors\":\"Matthew R. Orr, Nicholas P. Weber, Ron J. Reuter, S. Herzog, Heather M. Broughton, Samantha Bango\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/rec.14223\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Beaver‐based restoration techniques seek to assist with the recovery of stream systems that have been damaged, degraded, or destroyed. In addition to reintroducing beaver, restoration practitioners have sought to mimic the influence of beaver dams on stream processes by building beaver dam analogs (BDAs). Stream restoration has been criticized for a lack of extended monitoring and a dearth of empirical evidence for the efficacy of BDAs. Here, we extend early and previously reported 1‐ to 2‐year monitoring of five BDAs on a low‐gradient stream lacking woody riparian vegetation to 3–6 years, depending on the parameter examined. BDAs raised groundwater near the stream and did not affect water temperatures during the duration of monitoring. Consistent with elevated groundwater levels, riparian willow cuttings grew 2.8–9.6 times more when planted near BDAs than far from BDAs, which was more than the 1.3‐ to 1.4‐fold difference after the first growing season. In contrast, a short‐term association between BDAs and willow survival disappeared in the long term. Likewise, sediment aggradation above the upstream BDA 1 year after construction reversed completely 4 years later, probably due to structural damage during high flows that could not be repaired until flows abated. Annual peak flow levels explained over 80% of the variation in the number of structures requiring annual repair. Our results suggest that BDA‐based restoration should account for both the costs of structure maintenance during project planning and the importance of long‐term monitoring during project assessment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54487,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Restoration Ecology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-15\",\"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.14223\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Restoration Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.14223","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

摘要

以海狸为基础的恢复技术旨在帮助恢复受到破坏、退化或毁坏的溪流系统。除了重新引入海狸之外,修复实践者还试图通过建造海狸坝模拟物(BDAs)来模仿海狸坝对溪流过程的影响。溪流恢复因缺乏长期监测和缺乏海狸坝有效性的经验证据而饱受批评。在这里,我们将早期和之前报道的对一条缺乏木本河岸植被的低坡度河流上的五个 BDA 的 1 到 2 年监测延长到 3 到 6 年,具体时间取决于考察的参数。在监测期间,BDA 提高了溪流附近的地下水位,但并未影响水温。与地下水位升高相一致的是,在 BDA 附近种植的河岸柳树插条的生长量是远离 BDA 的柳树插条的 2.8-9.6 倍,这比第一个生长季节后 1.3-1.4 倍的差异还要大。相比之下,BDA 与柳树存活率之间的短期联系在长期内消失了。同样,上游 BDA 上的沉积物在建成 1 年后的 4 年后完全逆转,这可能是由于结构在大流量时受到破坏,而在流量减弱之前无法修复。在每年需要修复的结构数量的变化中,年峰值流量水平的解释率超过 80%。我们的研究结果表明,基于 BDA 的修复工程在项目规划时应考虑结构维护成本,在项目评估时应考虑长期监测的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Multiyear trajectories of stream and riparian responses to beaver dam analogs on a low‐gradient channel lacking woody riparian vegetation
Beaver‐based restoration techniques seek to assist with the recovery of stream systems that have been damaged, degraded, or destroyed. In addition to reintroducing beaver, restoration practitioners have sought to mimic the influence of beaver dams on stream processes by building beaver dam analogs (BDAs). Stream restoration has been criticized for a lack of extended monitoring and a dearth of empirical evidence for the efficacy of BDAs. Here, we extend early and previously reported 1‐ to 2‐year monitoring of five BDAs on a low‐gradient stream lacking woody riparian vegetation to 3–6 years, depending on the parameter examined. BDAs raised groundwater near the stream and did not affect water temperatures during the duration of monitoring. Consistent with elevated groundwater levels, riparian willow cuttings grew 2.8–9.6 times more when planted near BDAs than far from BDAs, which was more than the 1.3‐ to 1.4‐fold difference after the first growing season. In contrast, a short‐term association between BDAs and willow survival disappeared in the long term. Likewise, sediment aggradation above the upstream BDA 1 year after construction reversed completely 4 years later, probably due to structural damage during high flows that could not be repaired until flows abated. Annual peak flow levels explained over 80% of the variation in the number of structures requiring annual repair. Our results suggest that BDA‐based restoration should account for both the costs of structure maintenance during project planning and the importance of long‐term monitoring during project assessment.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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