Concordance of stream macroinvertebrate assemblage classifications:: How general are patterns from single-year surveys?

被引:39
作者
Mykra, Heikki [1 ]
Heino, Jani [2 ]
Muotka, Timo [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oulu, Res Programme Integrated River Basin Management, Finnish Environm Inst, FIN-90014 Oulu, Finland
[2] Univ Oulu, Res Programme Biodivers, Finnish Environm Inst, FIN-90014 Oulu, Finland
[3] Univ Oulu, Dept Biol, FIN-90014 Oulu, Finland
基金
芬兰科学院;
关键词
assemblage structure; biodiversity; benthic macroinvertebrates; streams; temporal variability;
D O I
10.1016/j.biocon.2008.02.017
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
We examined how the assemblage structure and assemblage-environment relationships of stream macroinvertebrates varied over three consecutive years in a boreal drainage system. We specifically examined whether classifications produced assemblage types that were stable through time, and how these assemblages could be predicted based on local environmental variables. We also used a combination of Procrustes rotation analysis and NMDS ordinations to examine the degree of year-to-year concordance of assemblage patterns. The composition of site clusters varied among years, resulting in only moderate among-year concordance of assemblage classifications. Stream width and in-stream habitat conditions, especially macrophyte cover, were the most important variables discriminating among the cluster groups. Despite temporally variable assemblage classifications, the overall macroinvertebrate assemblage structure was concordant among years. Among-year concordance was higher in-streams with low temporal variation in the physical environment, as well as high abundance and low variability of macrophytes. Due to among-year variability in cluster composition and weakly predictable assemblage-environment relationships, a posteriori assemblage classifications may be of limited value in the conservation planning of headwater streams. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1218 / 1223
页数:6
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]   Unlocking the potential of protected areas for freshwaters [J].
Abell, Robin ;
Allan, J. David ;
Lehner, Bernhard .
BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2007, 134 (01) :48-63
[2]  
Bowden WB, 1999, J N AM BENTHOL SOC, V18, P151
[3]   Spatial heterogeneity reduces temporal variability in stream insect communities [J].
Brown, BL .
ECOLOGY LETTERS, 2003, 6 (04) :316-325
[4]   Biological processes in running waters and their implications for the assessment of ecological integrity [J].
Bunn, SE ;
Davies, PM .
HYDROBIOLOGIA, 2000, 422 (0) :61-70
[5]  
Digby PGN, 1987, MULTIVARIATE ANAL EC, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-94-009-3007-0
[6]  
Hawkins CP, 2000, ECOL APPL, V10, P1456, DOI 10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1456:DAEOPM]2.0.CO
[7]  
2
[8]   Assessing physical surrogates for biodiversity:: Do tributary and stream type classifications reflect macroinvertebrate assemblage diversity in running waters? [J].
Heino, J ;
Mykrä, H .
BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2006, 129 (03) :418-426
[9]   Taxon-specific responses to high-flow disturbance in streams: implications for population persistence [J].
Holomuzki, JR ;
Biggs, BJF .
JOURNAL OF THE NORTH AMERICAN BENTHOLOGICAL SOCIETY, 2000, 19 (04) :670-679
[10]   PROTEST - A PROCRUSTEAN RANDOMIZATION TEST OF COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT CONCORDANCE [J].
JACKSON, DA .
ECOSCIENCE, 1995, 2 (03) :297-303