Chalk stream restoration: Physical and ecological responses to gravel augmentation

To mitigate the morphological and ecological impacts of direct (e.g. dredging) and indirect (e.g. damaged river function) sediment loss, gravel augmentation is commonly practiced in river systems globally. Despite this, the effectiveness of this practice remains poorly understood, especially in less...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2024-11, Vol.19 (11), p.e0313876
Hauptverfasser: Dolman, Lewis A, Vowles, Andrew S, Kemp, Paul S
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To mitigate the morphological and ecological impacts of direct (e.g. dredging) and indirect (e.g. damaged river function) sediment loss, gravel augmentation is commonly practiced in river systems globally. Despite this, the effectiveness of this practice remains poorly understood, especially in less often considered systems such as chalk streams which present uncommon conditions (e.g. low stream power, stable flow) and may respond to interventions in ways that differ from systems more commonly studied. This study quantified immediate (0-1 years) and short-term (1-2 years) physical and ecological responses to gravel augmentation at two English chalk stream restoration sites: Home Stream (HS; River Test) and East Lodge (EL; River Itchen). We quantified habitat (depth, velocity, substrate composition), cover of different macrophytes, and macroinvertebrate (before-after-control-impact) abundance and community structure. Restoration reduced depth and increased gravel cover in both sites and decreased the cover of filamentous green algae in HS. Macroinvertebrate communities became more dominated by silt-intolerant taxa, while abundance [HS only] and taxon richness increased 1-2 years post-restoration. Whilst the responses found were generally positive in light of the restoration goals, the effects varied across sites, post-restoration time periods and ecological groups, emphasising the need for the more holistic monitoring of restoration projects considering community-level responses at different sites and systems over ecologically relevant timescales. This will help inform on the generality and longevity of responses and provide the evidence needed to develop sound restoration practice.
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0313876