Instream and riparian implications of weed cutting in a chalk river

Ecological Engineering

Volumn 71, Issue , 2014, Pages 290-300

  Old, G H ^a   Naden, P S ^a   Rameshwaran, P ^a   Acreman, M C ^a   Baker, S ^a   Edwards, F K ^a   Sorensen, J P R ^b   Mountford, O ^a   Gooddy, D C ^b   Stratford, C J ^a   Scarlett, P M ^a   Newman, J R ^a   Neal, M ^a  

^a CENTRE FOR ECOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY   (United Kingdom)

^b BRITISH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Chalk stream; Conveyance; Ecology; Management; Weed cutting; Wetland

Indexed keywords

MANAGEMENT; WETLANDS;

CHALK STREAM; CONVEYANCE;

ECOLOGY;

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; FLOW PATTERN; FLOW VELOCITY; FRESHWATER ENVIRONMENT; MACROPHYTE; PHYSICOCHEMICAL PROPERTY; RESTORATION ECOLOGY; RIPARIAN ZONE; WEED CONTROL; WETLAND;

ENGLAND; LAMBOURN RIVER; UNITED KINGDOM; WEST BERKSHIRE;

EID: 84908593989     PISSN: 09258574     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.07.006     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Acreman M.C., Ferguson A. Environmental flows and European Water Framework Directive. Freshwater Biol. 2010, 55:32-48.
2. Allen D.J., Darling W.G., Gooddy D.C., Lapworth D.J., Newell A.J., Williams A.T., Allen D., Abesser C. Interaction between groundwater, the hyporheic zone and a Chalk stream: a case study from the River Lambourn, UK. Hydrogeol. J. 2010, 18(5):1125-1141. 10.1007/s10040-010-0592-2.
3. Altor A.E., Mitsch W.J. Methane flux from created riparian marshes: relationship to intermittent versus continuous inundation and emergent macrophytes. Ecol. Eng. 2006, 28(3):224-234.
4. Audet J., Elsgaard L., Kjærgaard C., Larsen S.E., Hoffmann C.C. Greenhouse gas emissions from a Danish riparian wetland before and after restoration. Ecol. Eng. 2013, 57:170-182.
5. Baattrup-Pedersen A., Larsen S.E., Riis T. Composition and richness of macrophyte communities in small Danish streams-influence of environmental factors and weed cutting. Hydrobiologia 2003, 495:171-179.
6. Baattrup-Pedersen A., Riis T. Impacts of different weed cutting practices on macrophyte species diversity and composition in a Danish stream. River Res. Appl. 2004, 20:103-114.
7. Blake M., Nystrom P., Hart P. The effect of weed cover on juvenile signal crayfish (pacifastacus-leniusculus dana) exposed to adult crayfish and nonpredatory fish. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 1994, 31:297-306.
8. Bovee K.D. A guide to stream habitat analysis using the IFIM. US Fish and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-82/26 1982, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Fort Collins, USA.
9. British Standards Institution BS 3680:Part 3A: 1980 Methods of Measurement of Liquid Flow in Open Channels, Part 3. Stream Flow Measurement, Part 3A. Velocity-Area Methods 1980, BSI, London.
10. Bullock A., Gustard A., Grainger E.S. Instream flow requirements for aquatic ecology in two British rivers. Institute of Hydrology Report No. 115 1991, 138. Institute of Hydrology, Wallingford.
11. CEH Flood Estimation Handbook CD-ROM, Version 3, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology 2009, CEH, UK.
12. Chambers J.E., Wilkinson P.B., Uhlemann S., Sorensen J.P.R., Roberts C., Newell A.J., Ward W., Binley A., Williams P.J., Gooddy D.C., Old G., Bai L. Derivation of lowland riparian wetland deposit architecture using geophysical image analysis and interface detection. Water Resour. Res. 2014, (in press).
13. Chow V.T. Open-Channel Hydraulics 1959, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
14. Clarke S.J., Wharton G. Sediment nutrient characteristics and aquatic macrophytes in lowland English rivers. Sci. Total Environ. 2001, 266:103-112.
15. Clemens B.J., Binder T.R., Docker M.F., Moser M.L., Sower S.A. Similarities, differences, and unknowns in biology and management of three parasitic lampreys of North America. Fisheries 2010, 35:580-594.
16. Cotton J.A., Wharton G., Bass J.A.B., Heppell C.M., Wotton R.S. The effects of seasonal changes to in-stream vegetation cover on patterns of flow and accumulation of sediment. Geomorphology 2006, 77:320-334.
17. Crisp D.T. Environmental requirements of common riverine European salmonid fish species in freshwater with particular reference to physical and chemical aspects. Hydrobiologia 1996, 323:201-221.
18. Dawson F.H. The annual production of the aquatic macrophyte Ranunculus penicillatus var. calcareus (R.W. Butcher) C.D.K. Cook. Aquat. Bot. 1976, 2:51-73.
19. Dawson F.H. Aquatic plant management in semi natural streams: the role of marginal vegetation. J. Environ. Manage. 1978, 6:213-221.
20. Dawson F.H., Clinton E.M.F., Ladle M. Invertebrates on cut weed removed during weed-cutting operations along an English river, the River Frome, Dorset. Aquacult. Fish. Manage. 1991, 22:113-121.
21. Dawson F.H., Kern-Hansen U. The effect of natural and artificial shade on the macrophytes of lowland streams and the use of shade as a management technique. Int. Rev. Gesamten Hydrobiol. 1979, 64:437-455.
22. Dunbar M.J., Ibbotson A., Gowing I., McDonnell N., Acreman M.C., Pinder C. Further validation of PHABSIM for the habitat requirements of salmonid fish. Final Project Report to Environment Agency (W6-036) and CEH(C00962) 2002, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford. Environment Agency, Bristol.
23. Edwards T.K., Glysson G.D. Field Measurements of Fluvial Sediment 1999, 89. U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of water resources Investigations, http://pubs.usgs.gov/twri/twri3-c2/, Book 3, Chapter C2.
24. European Commission Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23rd October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy 2000, European Commission, Brussels, Official Journal 22nd December 2000 L 327/1.
25. Water Meadows 2005, Forest Text, Cardigan, UK. M. Everard (Ed.).
26. Franklin P.A. Dynamic analysis and modelling of hydroecology in two chalk streams. PhD Thesis (Unpublished) 2007, University of Reading, Reading.
27. 2O from a welsh peatland following simulation of water table drawdown: potential feedback to climatic change. Biogeochemistry 1993, 19(1):51-60.
28. Gauci V., Fowler D., Chapman S.J., Dise N.B. Controls on suppression of methane flux from a peat bog subjected to simulated acid rain sulphate deposition. Biogeochemistry 2004, 71(2):141-162.
29. Green J.C. Velocity and turbulence distribution around lotic macrophytes. Aquat. Ecol. 2005, 39:1-10.
30. Gunn R.J.M. The biology of Brachycentrus-subnubilus Curtis (Trichoptera) in the River Frome, Dorset. Hydrobiologia 1985, 120:133-140.
31. Ham S.F., Wright J.F., Berrie A.D. The Effect of Cutting on the Growth and recession of the Freshwater Macrophyte Ranunculus penicillatus (Dumort.) Bab. Var. calcareous (R.W. Butcher) C.D.K. Cook. J. Environ. Manage. 1982, 15:263-271.
32. Hearne J.W., Armitage P.D. Implications of the annual macrophyte growth cycle on habitat in river. Regul. Rivers Res. Manage. 1993, 8:313-322.
33. Holmes N.T.H., Newman J.R., Chadd S., Rouen K.J., Saint L., Dawson F.H. Mean trophic rank: a user's manual. R&D Technical Report E38 1999, 134. Environment Agency.
34. Ibbotson A.T., Ingram A., Cove R.J., Gallagher M., Hornby D.D., Furse M., Williams C. A Review of Grayling Ecology, Status and Management Practice; Recommendations for Future Management 2000, 114. Environment Agency (WRC. Dissemination Centre), Swindon.
35. Kaenel B., Uehlinger U. Aquatic plant management: ecological effects in two streams of the Swiss Plateau. Hydrobiologia 1999, 415:257-263.
36. Killeen I.J. Ecology of Desmoulin's Whorl Snail. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Ecology Series No. 6 2003, English Nature, Peterborough.
37. Madsen J.D., Chambers P.A., James W.F., Koch E.W., Westlake D.F. The interaction between water movement, sediment dynamics and submerged macrophytes. Hydrobiologia 2001, 444:71-84.
38. Mainstone C. Chalk Rivers: Nature Conservation and Management 1999, WRc, Medmenham.
39. UK Hydrometric Register. Hydrological data UK series 2008, 210. Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Wallingford. T.J. Marsh, J. Hannaford (Eds.).
40. McGahey C., Samuels P.G. Methodology for conveyance estimation in two-stage straight, skewed and meandering channels. Proceedings of the XXX Congress of the International Association for Hydraulic Research 2003.
41. Moore T.R., Knowles R. The influence of water table levels on methane and carbon dioxide emissions from peatland soils. Can. J. Soil Sci. 1989, 69:33-38.
42. Muchan K. Hyporheic invertebrate community response to flow permanence in a chalk stream. MSc Thesis (unpublished) 2012, University of Birmingham, Birmingham.
43. Naden P.S., Rameshwaran P., Mountford O., Robertson C. The influence of macrophyte growth, typical of eutrophic conditions, on river flow velocities and turbulence production. Hydrol. Processes 2006, 20:3915-3938.
44. Nikora V. Hydrodynamics of aquatic ecosystems: an interface between ecology, biomechanics and environmental fluid mechanics. River Res. Appl. 2009, 10.1002/rra.1291.
45. Nikora V., Larned S., Nikora N., Debnath K., Cooper G., Reid M. Hydraulic resistance due to aquatic vegetation in small streams: a field study. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2008, 134:1326-1332.
46. Old G.H., Leeks G.J.L., Packman J.C., Stokes N., Williams N.D., Smith B.P.G., Hewitt E.J., Lewis S. Dynamics of sediment-associated metals in a highly urbanised catchment: Bradford, west Yorkshire. J. CIWEM 2002, 18:11-16.
47. Pearson R.G., Jones N.V. Effects of weed-cutting on macro invertebrate fauna of a canalized section of the River Hull, a northern English chalk stream. J. Environ. Manage. 1978, 7:91-97.
48. Phillips G.L., Eminson D., Moss B. A mechanism to account for macrophyte decline in progressively eutrophicated waters. Aquat. Bot. 1978, 4:103-126.
49. Rameshwaran P., Shiono K. Quasi two-dimensional model for straight overbank flows through emergent vegetation on floodplains. J. Hydraul. Res. 2007, 45:302-315.
50. Raven P.J., Fox P., Everard M., Holmes N.T.H., Dawson F.H. River Habitat Survey: a new system for classifying rivers according to their habitat quality. Freshwater Quality: Defining the Indefinable? 1997, 215-234. The Stationery Office, Edinburgh. P.J. Boon, D.L. Howell (Eds.).
51. Riis T., Biggs B.J.F. Hydrologic and hydraulic control of macrophyte establishment and performance in streams. Limnol. Oceanogr. 2003, 48:1488-1497.
52. British Plant Communities Volume 4. Aquatic Communities, Swamps and Tall-Herb Fens 1995, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. J.S. Rodwell (Ed.).
53. Sand-Jensen K. Influence of submerged macrophytes on sediment composition and near-bed flow in lowland streams. Freshwater Biol. 1998, 39:663-679.
54. Schulz M., Kozerski H.P., Pluntke T., Rinke T. The influence of macrophytes on sedimentation and nutrient retention in the lower River Spree (Germany). Water Res. 2003, 37(3):569-578.
55. Sha C., Mitsch W.J., Mander Ü., Lu J., Batson J., Zhang L., He W. Methane emissions from freshwater riverine wetlands. Ecol. Eng. 2011, 37(1):16-24.
56. Shannon R.D., White J.R. A three-year study of controls on methane emissions from two Michigan peatlands. Biogeochemistry 1994, 27(1):35-60.
57. Smith D.G., Davies-Colley R.J. Perception of water clarity and colour in terms of suitability for recreational use. J. Environ. Manage. 1992, 36:225-235.
58. Sorensen J.P.R., Butcher A.S. Water level monitoring pressure transducers: a need for industry-wide standards. Ground Water Monit. Rem. 2011, 31(4):56-62. 10.1111/j.1745-6592.2011.01346.x.
59. Soulsby C., Youngson A.F., Moir H.J., Malcolm I.A. Fine sediment influence on salmonid spawning habitat in a lowland agricultural stream: a preliminary assessment. Sci. Total Environ. 2001, 265:295-307.
60. Spink A.J., Murphy K.J., Smith S.M., Westlake D.F. Effects of eutrophication on Ranunculus and Potamogeton. J. Aquat. Plant Manage. 1993, 31:113-117.
61. Swales S. Impacts of Weed-cutting on Fisheries: an Experimental Study in a Small Lowland River. Fish. Manage. 1982, 13(4):125-137.
62. UK BAP Steering Group for Chalk Rivers The State of England's Chalk Rivers 2004, Environment Agency, Bristol.
63. Wade A.J., Whitehead P.G., Hornberger G.M., Snook D.L. On modelling the flow controls on macrophyte and epiphyte dynamics in a lowland permeable catchment: the River Kennet, southern England. Sci. Total Environ. 2002, 282-283:375-393.
64. Walling D.E., Collins A.L., McMellin G.K. A reconnaissance survey of the source of interstitial fine sediment recovered from salmonid spawning gravels in England and Wales. Hydrobiologia 2003, 497:91-108.
65. Warren L.L., Wotton R.S., Wharton G., Bass J.A.B., Cotton J.A. The transport of fine particulate organic matter in vegetaeted chalk streams. Ecohydrology 2009, 2:480-491.
66. Waters B.F. A methodology for evaluating the effects of different stream flows on salmonid habitat. Instream Flow Needs 1976, 254-266. American Society of Civil Engineers (with the American Fisheries Society), New York. J.F. Orsborn, C.H. Allman (Eds.).
67. Westlake D.F. Some effects of low-velocity currents on the metabolism of aquatic macrophytes. J. Exp. Bot. 1967, 18:187-205.
68. Westlake D.F., Casey H., Dawson F.H., Ladle M., Mann R.H.K., Marker A.F.H.M. The chalk stream ecosystem. Productivity Problems of Freshwaters 1972, 615-635. Warsawa, Krakow. Z. Kajak, A. Hillbright-Illkowska (Eds.).
69. Wharton G., Cotton J.A., Wotton R.S., Bass J.A.B., Heppell C.M., Trimmer M., Sanders I.A., Warren L.L. Macrophytes and suspension-feeding invertebrates modify flows and fine sediments in the Frome and Piddle catchments, Dorset (UK). J. Hydrol. 2006, 330:171-184.
70. Wheeldon J. The River Avon cSAC Conservation Strategy 2003, English Nature, Peterborough.
71. Wheeler B.D., Gowing D.J.G., Shaw S.C., Mountford J.O., Money R.P. Ecohydrological Guidelines for Lowland Wetland Plant Communities 2004, Environment Agency (Anglian Region), Peterborough. A.W. Brooks, P.V. José, M.I. Whiteman (Eds.).
72. Whiting G.J., Chanton J.P. Primary production control of methane emission from wetlands. Nature 1993, 364:794-795.
73. Wright J.F. Spatial and temporal occurrence of invertebrates in a chalk stream, Berkshire, England. Hydrobiologia 1992, 248:11-30.
74. WWF-UK Rivers on the Edge 2009, WWF-UK, London.
75. Yen B.C. Open channel flow resistance. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2002, 128:20-39.