Search for: All records

Abstract Riparian zones are a critical terrestrial‐aquatic ecotone. They play important roles in ecosystems including (1) harboring biodiversity, (2) influencing light and carbon fluxes to aquatic food webs, (3) maintaining water quality and streamflow, (4) enhancing aquatic habitat, (5) influencing greenhouse gas production, and (6) sequestering carbon. Defining what qualifies as a riparian zone is a first step to delineation. Many definitions of riparian boundaries focus on static attributes or a subset of potential functions without recognizing that they are spatially continuous, temporally dynamic, and multi‐dimensional. We emphasize that definitions should consider multiple ecological and biogeochemical functions and physical gradients, and explore how this approach influences spatial characterization of riparian zones. One or more of the following properties can guide riparian delineation: (1) distinct species, elevated biodiversity, or species with specific adaptations to flooding and inundation near streams relative to nearby upland areas; (2) unique vegetation structure directly influencing irradiance or organic material inputs to aquatic ecosystems; (3) hydrologic and geomorphic features or processes maintaining floodplains; (4) hydric soil properties that differ from the uplands; and/or (5) elevated retention of dissolved and suspended materials relative to adjacent uplands. Considering these properties for an operational and dynamic definition of riparian zones recognizes that riparian boundaries vary in space (e.g., variation of riparian corridor widths within or among watersheds) and time (e.g., responses to hydrological variance and climate change). Inclusive definitions addressing multiple riparian functions could facilitate attainment of research and management goals by linking properties of interest to specific outcomes. 

Abstract Accelerating the design and implementation of environmental flows (e-flows) is essential to curb the rapid, ongoing loss of freshwater biodiversity and the benefits it provides to people. However, the effectiveness of e-flow programs may be limited by a singular focus on ensuring adequate flow conditions at local sites, which overlooks the role of other ecological processes. Recent advances in metasystem ecology have shown that biodiversity patterns and ecosystem functions across river networks result from the interplay of local (environmental filtering and biotic interactions) and regional (dispersal) ecological processes. No guidelines currently exist to account for these processes in designing e-flows. We address this gap by providing a step-by-step operational framework that outlines how e-flows can be designed to conserve or restore metasystem dynamics. Our recommendations are relevant to diverse regulatory contexts and can improve e-flow outcomes even in basins with limited in situ data. 

Abstract Over half of global rivers and streams lack perennial flow, and understanding the distribution and drivers of their flow regimes is critical for understanding their hydrologic, biogeochemical, and ecological functions. We analyzed nonperennial flow regimes using 540 U.S. Geological Survey watersheds across the contiguous United States from 1979 to 2018. Multivariate analyses revealed regional differences in no‐flow fraction, date of first no flow, and duration of the dry‐down period, with further divergence between natural and human‐altered watersheds. Aridity was a primary driver of no‐flow metrics at the continental scale, while unique combinations of climatic, physiographic and anthropogenic drivers emerged at regional scales. Dry‐down duration showed stronger associations with nonclimate drivers compared to no‐flow fraction and timing. Although the sparse distribution of nonperennial gages limits our understanding of such streams, the watersheds examined here suggest the important role of aridity and land cover change in modulating future stream drying.