Spatial weighting of land use and temporal weighting of antecedent discharge improves prediction of stream condition

Landscape Ecology

Volumn 29, Issue 7, 2014, Pages 1171-1185

  Walsh, Christopher J ^a   Webb, J Angus ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Australia; Impervious; Macroinvertebrate assemblages; Melbourne; Riparian forest; SIGNAL score

Indexed keywords

EID: 84904966698     PISSN: 09212973     EISSN: 15729761     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10980-014-0050-y     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Allan JD (2004) Landscapes and riverscapes: the influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 35: 257-284.
2. Anon (1994) National River Processes and Management Program. Monitoring River Health Initiative. River Bioassessment Manual. Version 1. 0. Department of the Environment, Sport and Territories; Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation; Commonwealth Environment Protection Authority, Canberra.
3. Baker ME, Weller DE, Jordan TE (2007) Effects of stream map resolution on measures of riparian buffer distribution and nutrient retention potential. Landscape Ecol 22: 973-992.
4. Bond NR, Lake P, Arthington AH (2008) The impacts of drought on freshwater ecosystems: an Australian perspective. Hydrobiologia 600: 3-16.
5. Bond N, Thomson J, Reich P (2012) Macroinvertebrate responses to antecedent flow, long-term flow regime characteristics and landscape context in Victorian rivers. National Water Commission, Canberra.
6. Bureau of Meteorology (2011) Australian hydrological geospatial fabric (geofabric) product guide. Version 2. 0-November 2011. Australian Government, Bureau of Meteorology, Canberra.
7. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New York.
8. Chessman BC (1995) Rapid assessment of rivers using macroinvertebrates: a procedure based on habitat-specific sampling, family level identification and a biotic index. Aust J Ecol 20: 122-129.
9. Cuevas JG, Soto D, Arismendi I, Pino M, Lara A, Oyarzún C (2006) Relating land cover to stream properties in southern Chilean watersheds: trade-off between geographic scale, sample size, and explicative power. Biogeochemistry 81: 313-329.
10. Cuffney TF, Qian SS, Brightbill RA, May JT, Waite IR (2011) Response to King and Baker: limitations on threshold detection and characterization of community thresholds. Ecol Appl 21: 2840-2845.
11. Department of Planning and Community Development (2010) Planning schemes online: Victoria's planning schemes. The State of Victoria, Melbourne. http://planningschemes. dpcd. vic. gov. au/.
12. Department of Primary Industries (2011) Victorian resources online: land use. State of Victoria, Melbourne. http://vro. dpi. vic. gov. au/dpi/vro/vrosite. nsf/pages/landuse-home.
13. Fraterrigo JM, Downing JA (2008) The influence of land use on lake nutrients varies with watershed transport capacity. Ecosystems 11: 1021-1034.
14. Grace Detailed-GIS Services (2012) Directly connected imperviousness compilation for Melbourne Water selected catchments. Report prepared for Melbourne Water. Melbourne.
15. Humphrey CL, Storey AW, Thurtell L (2000) AUSRIVAS: operator sample processing errors and temporal variability-implications for model sensitivity. In: Wright JF, Sutcliffe DW, Furse MT (eds) Assessing the biological quality of fresh waters: RIVPACS and other techniques. Freshwater Biological Association, Ambleside, pp 143-163.
16. King RS, Baker ME (2011) An alternative view of ecological community thresholds and appropriate analyses for their detection: comment. Ecol Appl 21: 2833-2839.
17. King RS, Baker ME, Whigham DF et al (2005) Spatial considerations for linking watershed land cover to ecological indicators in streams. Ecol Appl 15: 137-153.
18. Lloyd NJ, Mac Nally R, Lake PS (2005) Spatial autocorrelation of assemblages of benthic invertebrates and its relationship to environmental factors in two upland rivers in southeastern Australia. Divers Distrib 11: 375-386.
19. Melbourne Water, Department of Environment and Primary Industries, The University of Melbourne (2013) Improving our understanding of water sensitive farm design pollution treatment systems: final position framework-May 2013. RMCG, Camberwell, Victoria.
20. Naiman RJ, Décamps H (1997) The ecology of interfaces: riparian zones. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 28: 621-658.
21. Peterson EE, Sheldon F, Darnell R, Bunn SE, Harch BD (2011) A comparison of spatially explicit landscape representation methods and their relationship to stream condition. Freshw Biol 56: 590-610.
22. Pusey BJ, Arthington AH (2003) Importance of the riparian zone to the conservation and management of freshwater fish: a review. Mar Freshw Res 54: 1-16.
23. Richardson JS, Naiman RJ, Bisson PA (2012) How did fixed-width buffers become standard practice for protecting freshwaters and their riparian areas from forest harvest practices? Freshw Sci 31: 232-238.
24. Rolls RJ, Leigh C, Sheldon F (2012) Mechanistic effects of low-flow hydrology on riverine ecosystems: ecological principles and consequences of alteration. Freshw Sci 31: 1163-1186.
25. Roth NE, Allan JD, Erickson DL (1996) Landscape influences on stream biotic integrity assessed at multiple spatial scales. Landsc Ecol 11: 141-156.
26. Sheldon F, Peterson EE, Boone E, Sippel S, Bunn SE, Harch BD (2012) Identifying the spatial scale of land use that most strongly influences overall river ecosystem health score. Ecol Appl 22: 2188-2203.
27. Stein JL, Stein JA, Nix HA (2002) Spatial analysis of anthropogenic river disturbance at regional and continental scales: identifying the wild rivers of Australia. Landsc Urban Plan 60: 1-25.
28. Stephenson JM, Morin A (2009) Covariation of stream community structure and biomass of algae, invertebrates and fish with forest cover at multiple spatial scales. Freshw Biol 54: 2139-2154.
29. Strayer DL, Beighley RE, Thompson LC et al (2003) Effects of land cover on stream ecosystems: roles of empirical models and scaling issues. Ecosystems 6: 407-423.
30. R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www. R-project. org.
31. Thomson JR, Bond NR, Cunningham SC et al (2012) The influences of climatic variation and vegetation on stream biota: lessons from the Big Dry in southeastern Australia. Glob Change Biol 18: 1582-1596.
32. Uriarte M, Yackulic CB, Lim Y, Arce-Nazario JA (2011) Influence of land use on water quality in a tropical landscape: a multi-scale analysis. Landsc Ecol 26: 1151-1164.
33. van Sickle J, Johnson CB (2008) Parametric distance weighting of landscape influence on streams. Landsc Ecol 23: 427-438.
34. EPA Victoria (2003) Rapid bioassessment methodology for rivers and streams. Guideline for environmental management, Publication No. 604. 1. Environment Protection Authority Victoria, Melbourne.
35. Walsh CJ (2006) Biological indicators of stream health using macroinvertebrate assemblage composition: a comparison of sensitivity to an urban gradient. Mar Freshw Res 57: 37-47.
36. Walsh CJ, Kunapo J (2009) The importance of upland flow paths in determining urban effects on stream ecosystems. J N Am Benthol Soc 28: 977-990.
37. Walsh CJ, Sharpe AK, Breen PF, Sonneman JA (2001) Effects of urbanization on streams of the Melbourne region, Victoria, Australia. I. Benthic macroinvertebrate communities. Freshw Biol 46: 535-551.
38. Walsh CJ, Waller KA, Gehling J, Mac Nally R (2007) Riverine invertebrate assemblages are degraded more by catchment urbanization than by riparian deforestation. Freshw Biol 52: 574-587.
39. Webb JA, King EL (2009) A Bayesian hierarchical trend analysis finds strong evidence for large-scale temporal declines in stream ecological condition around Melbourne, Australia. Ecography 32: 215-225.
40. Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Walker N, Saveliev AA, Smith GM (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer Science + Business Media, New York.