An assessment of cellulose filters as a standardized material for measuring litter breakdown in headwater streams

Ecohydrology

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 469-476

  Fritz, Ken M ^a   Fulton, Stephanie ^a   Johnson, Brent R ^a   Barton, Chris D ^b   Jack, Jeff D ^c   Word, David A ^c   Burke, Roger A ^a  

^a U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cellulose decomposition; Functional assessment; Litter breakdown; Standardization; Streams

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTIC; CELLULOSE DECOMPOSITION; CELLULOSE FILTERS; DECAY RATE; DECIDUOUS FOREST; ERGOSTEROL CONCENTRATION; EXPLANATORY POWER; FLOW DURATION; FLOW PERMANENCE; HEADWATER STREAM; LITTER BREAKDOWN; LITTERBAGS; NATURAL BREAKDOWN; PUBLIC DOMAINS; QUERCUS; SAMPLING DATES; STANDARDIZED MATERIALS; STREAM ASSESSMENT; STREAMS; SUBSTRATE TYPES; US GOVERNMENT; WHITE OAK;

ALCOHOLS; BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS; CATCHMENTS; CELLULOSE; FILTRATION; SUBSTRATES;

DECAY (ORGANIC);

BIOMASS; CATCHMENT; CELLULOSE; CONCENTRATION (COMPOSITION); DECIDUOUS FOREST; DECIDUOUS TREE; DECOMPOSITION; ERGOSTEROL; HEADWATER; INVERTEBRATE; LEAF LITTER; LITTER; STANDARDIZATION; STREAM; TAXONOMY;

UNITED STATES;

INVERTEBRATA; QUERCUS ALBA;

EID: 79956219482     PISSN: 19360584     EISSN: 19360592     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/eco.128     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Bärlocher F, Kendrick B. 1975. Leaf-conditioning by microorganisms. Oecologia 20: 359-362. DOI: 10.1007/BF00345526.
2. Benke AC, Huryn AD, Smock LA, Wallace JB. 1999. Length-mass relationships for freshwater macroinvertebrates in North America with particular reference to the southeastern United States. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 18: 308-343.
3. Bieńkowski P. 1990. Cellulose decomposition as bioenergetic indicator of soil degradation. Polish Ecological Studies 16: 235-244.
4. Boulton AJ, Boon PI. 1991. A review of methodology used to measure leaf litter decomposition in lotic environments: time to turn over an old leaf? Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 42: 1-43. DOI: 10.1071/MF9910001.
5. Boulton AJ, Quinn JM. 2000. A simple and versatile technique for assessing cellulose decomposition potential in floodplain and riverine sediments. Archiv für Hydrobiologie 150: 133-151.
6. Claret C, Boulton AJ, Dole-Olivier M-J, Marmonier P. 2001. Functional processes versus state variables: interstitial organic matter pathways in floodplain habitats. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 58: 1594-1602. DOI: 10.1139/cjfas-58-8-1594.
7. Cummins KW. 2002. Riparian-stream linkage paradigm. Internationale Vereinigung für Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie, Verhandlagen 28: 49-58.
8. Davies SP, Jackson SK. 2006. The biological condition gradient: a descriptive model for interpreting change in aquatic ecosystems. Ecological Applications 16: 1251-1266. DOI: 10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[1251:TBCGAD]2.0.CO;2.
9. Edwards CA. 1967. Relationships between weights, volumes and numbers of soil animals. In Progress in Soil Biology, Graff O, Satchell JE (eds). North-Holland Publishing Company: Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 585-594.
10. Egglishaw HJ. 1972. An experimental study of the breakdown of cellulose in fast-flowing streams. Memorie dell'Istituto Italiano di Idrobiologia Supplement 29: 405-428.
11. Enríquez S, Duarte CM, Sand-Jensen K. 1993. Patterns in decomposition rates among photosynthetic organisms: the importance of detritus C:N:P content. Oecologia 94: 457-471. DOI: 10.1007/BF00566960.
12. Friberg N, Winterbourn MJ. 1997. Effects of native and exotic forest on benthic stream biota in New Zealand: a colonization study. Marine and Freshwater Research 48: 267-275. DOI: 10.1071/MF96094.
13. Fritz KM, Fulton S, Johnson BR, Barton CD, Jack JD, Word DA, Burke RA. 2010. Structural and functional characteristics of natural and constructed channels draining a reclaimed mountaintop removal and valley fill coal mine. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 29: 673-689. DOI: 10.1899/09-060.1.
14. Fritz KM, Johnson BR, Walters DM. 2006. Field Operations Manual for Assessing the Hydrologic Permanence and Ecological Condition of Headwater Streams. EPA/600/R-06/126. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington DC.
15. Gessner MO, Chauvet E. 2002. A case for using litter breakdown to assess functional stream integrity. Ecological Applications 12: 498-510. DOI: 10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[0498:ACFULB] 2.0.CO;2.
16. Gessner MO, Chauvet E, Dobson M. 1999. A perspective on leaf litter breakdown in streams. Oikos 85: 377-384.
17. Graça MAS. 1993. Patterns and processes in detritus-based stream systems. Limnologica 23: 107-114.
18. Harrison AF, Latter PM, Walton DWH. 1988. Cotton Strip Assay: An Index of Decomposition in Soils. Institute of Terrestrial Ecology: Cumbria.
19. Hildrew AG, Townsend CR, Francis J, Finch K. 1984. Cellulolytic decomposition in streams of contrasting pH and its relationship with invertebrate community structure. Freshwater Biology 14: 323-328. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.1984.tb00045.x.
20. Holomuzki JR, Hoyle JD. 1990. Effect of predatory fish presence on habitat use and diel movement of the stream amphipod, Gammarus minus. Freshwater Biology 24: 509-517. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.1990.tb00728.x.
21. Huryn AD, Butz Huryn VM, Arbuckle CJ, Tsomides L. 2002. Catchment land-use, macroinvertebrates and detritus processing in headwater streams: taxonomic richness versus function. Freshwater Biology 47: 401-415. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2427.2002.00812.x.
22. Latter PM, Howson G. 1977. The use of cotton strips to indicate cellulose decomposition in the field. Pedobiologia 17: 145-155.
23. Li Q, Moorhead DL, DeForest JL, Henderson R, Chen J, Jensen R. 2009. Mixed litter decomposition in a managed Missouri Ozark forest ecosystem. Forest Ecology and Management 257: 688-694. DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2008.09.043.
24. Montgomery HJ, Monreal CM, Young JC, Seifert KA. 2000. Determination of soil fungal biomass from soil ergosterol analyses. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 32: 1207-1217. DOI: 10.1016/S0038-0717(00)00037-7.
25. Moorhead DL, Reynolds JF. 1993. Changing carbon chemistry of buried creosote bush litter during decomposition in the Northern Chihuahuan Desert. American Midland Naturalist 130: 83-89.
26. Ostrofsky ML. 1997. Relationship between chemical characteristics of autumn-shed leaves and aquatic processing rates. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16: 750-759.
27. Petersen RC, Cummins KW. 1974. Leaf processing in a woodland stream. Freshwater Biology 4: 343-368. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2427. 1974.tb00103.x.
28. Phillippi MA, Boebinger A. 1986. A vegetational analysis of three small watersheds in Robinson Forest, Eastern Kentucky. Castanea 51: 11-30.
29. Quinn JM, Burrell GP, Parkyn SM. 2000. Influences of leaf toughness and nitrogen content on in-stream processing and nutrient uptake by litter in a Waikato, New Zealand, pasture stream and streamside channels. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 34: 253-271.
30. Richardson JS. 1992. Food, microhabitat, or both? Macroinvertebrate use of leaf accumulations in a montane stream. Freshwater Biology 27: 169-176. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.1992.tb00531.x.
31. Sample BE, Cooper RJ, Greer RD, Whitmore RC. 1993. Estimation of insect biomass by length and width. American Midland Naturalist 129: 234-240.
32. Slocum MG, Roberts J, Mendelssohn IA. 2009. Artist canvas as a new standard for the cotton-strip assay. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 172: 71-74. DOI: 10.1002/jpln.200800179.
33. Tiegs SD, Langhans SD, Tockner K, Gessner MO. 2007. Cotton strips as a leaf surrogate to measure decomposition in river floodplain habitats. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 26: 70-77. DOI: 10.1899/0887-3593(2007)26[70:CSAALS]2.0.CO;2.
34. 2: effects on development of mosquito. Freshwater Biology 48: 1432-1439. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2427.2003.01102.x.
35. Webster JR, Benfield EF. 1986. Vascular plant breakdown in freshwater ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 17: 567-594. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.es.17.110186.003031.
36. Woods AJ, Omernik JM, Martin WH, Pond GJ, Andrews WM, Call SM, Comstock JA, Taylor DD. 2002. Ecoregions of Kentucky. US Geological Survey: Reston, VA.
37. Young RG, Matthaei CD, Townsend CR. 2008. Organic matter breakdown and ecosystem metabolism: functional indicators for assessing river ecosystem health. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 27: 605-625. DOI: 10.1899/07-121.1.