Get access
Advertisement

Hydromorphological restoration of running waters: effects on benthic invertebrate assemblages

Authors

  • ANDREA SUNDERMANN,

    1. Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum, Department of Limnology and Conservation, Gelnhausen, Germany
    2. Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, Frankfurt/Main, Germany
    Search for more papers by this author
  • CLAUDIA ANTONS,

    1. Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum, Department of Limnology and Conservation, Gelnhausen, Germany
    Search for more papers by this author
  • NATHALIE CRON,

    1. Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum, Department of Limnology and Conservation, Gelnhausen, Germany
    Search for more papers by this author
  • ARMIN W. LORENZ,

    1. University of Duisburg-Essen, Department of Applied Zoology and Hydrobiology, Essen, Germany
    Search for more papers by this author
  • DANIEL HERING,

    1. University of Duisburg-Essen, Department of Applied Zoology and Hydrobiology, Essen, Germany
    Search for more papers by this author
  • PETER HAASE

    1. Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum, Department of Limnology and Conservation, Gelnhausen, Germany
    2. Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, Frankfurt/Main, Germany
    Search for more papers by this author

Andrea Sundermann, Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum, Department of Limnology and Conservation, Clamecystrasse 12, 63571 Gelnhausen, Germany. E-mail: Andrea.Sundermann@senckenberg.de

Summary

1. River restoration has received considerable attention, with much recent focus on restoring river hydromorphology to improve impoverished aquatic communities. However, we still lack a clear understanding of the response of aquatic biota to river restoration.

2. We studied the effects of hydromorphological restoration on benthic invertebrate assemblages in 25 river sites in Germany using standardised methods. Restoration efforts were primarily aimed to restore habitat heterogeneity; correspondingly, habitat diversity increased at most sites.

3. Similarity of benthic invertebrate assemblages between restored and unrestored river sections was low (mean similarity was 0.32 for Jaccard and 0.46 for Sørensen). Community-based metrics, such as the percentage of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera taxa, also differed between restored and unrestored sections.

4. Only three of the 25 restored sections were classified as having ‘good ecological quality’ class according to the European Water Framework Directive criteria; hence, poor water quality is probably one factor impeding recolonisation.

5. Our results show that isolated restoration measures do not necessarily result in positive effects on aquatic biota and that better understanding of the interconnectedness within a catchment is required before we can adequately predict biotic responses to structural river restoration.

Get access to the full text of this article

Ancillary