Search for: All records

Riparian forests influence stream ecosystems by controlling light availability, nutrient inputs and adding large wood (LW). While many functions of in-stream LW are well studied, there is limited research on their carbon storage potential, especially in eastern North America. Due to forest recovery following historic clearing regionally, riparian forest structure is changing, with implications for LW recruitment, accumulation and carbon dynamics. To better understand the LW carbon pool and relationships with riparian forest structure, we collected data on the forest and in-stream LW in headwater streams in the mature, northern hardwood Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest (HBEF) in New Hampshire, USA. To understand how in-stream carbon storage will change as these second-growth forests develop, we collected comparison data at streams in old-growth forests of the Adirondacks of New York State. Streams at the HBEF contained 7.5 Mg C/ha in LW (SD = 5.8 Mg C/ha), exhibiting substantial variation within and between sites. This variation is linked to heterogeneity in riparian forest structure, especially the large tree basal area. Our data suggest the storage potential of stream LW will increase as riparian forests age, with old-growth stands storing 23.8 Mg C/ha as LW (SD = 9.8). This provides a first assessment of the LW carbon pool in the region and the biotic factors that influence this storage. The positive relationship between LW carbon and large trees, and the increased storage in old-growth forests supports conservation and management that promote large trees and old forests in riparian zones. Such practices may improve the value of in-stream LW carbon as a natural climate solution. 

ABSTRACT Decades‐old research describes dynamic interdependence among aquatic and terrestrial food webs, leading to calls for integrating cross‐ecosystem linkages with landscape ecology to evaluate dynamics of spatially‐subsidised food webs. Though development of meta‐community theory has suggested that such spatial dynamics may help sustain biodiversity, empirical data remain limited. In northern Yellowstone National Park, over a century of terrestrial wildlife dynamics, including the extirpation and subsequent reintroduction of wolves, have contributed to a habitat mosaic in which stream‐riparian ecosystems are dominated by either woody or herbaceous vegetation. In the context of this habitat mosaic, we addressed the overarching questions: (1) Are habitat mosaics associated with spatial and temporal variation in reciprocal fluxes and linked food webs and (2) how do biodiversity, organism traits and species interactions influence, and are they influenced by, that spatial and temporal variation?From 2019 to 2021, we intensively sampled eight headwater streams to characterise reciprocal fluxes of aquatic and terrestrial invertebrates and the patterns of potential responses by fish, birds, bats and spiders. We evaluated sites individually as well as how they contributed to a meta‐community.We found that local stream‐riparian ecosystems contributed to a mosaic in which reciprocal fluxes of invertebrates among local patches were asynchronous and tracked by both aquatic and terrestrial consumers in ways mediated by organism traits. Within sites, aquatic and terrestrial invertebrate fluxes were seasonally asynchronous with each other, but these patterns varied from site to site. Across the mosaic, comparisons of daily aquatic insect emergence varied from 25% to 167% among streams and did so variably throughout the year, revealing asynchronous dynamics created at the meta‐community scale. Daily inputs of terrestrial invertebrates were similarly asynchronous across the mosaic, varying from 14% to 170%. These asynchronies were positively correlated with invertebrate beta diversity and associated with varying riparian vegetation, stream temperature, and flow regimes. In turn, in situ consumers tracked the allochthonous invertebrate prey in ways that were mediated by site context (i.e., local habitat characteristics) and consumer traits (e.g., range, foraging strategy and breeding requirements).Based on these observations as an example, we infer there is not one way for food webs to be reciprocally and spatially linked, but multiple ways that can vary both across a spatial mosaic and through time. Our findings provide empirical evidence suggesting potential relationships between habitat complexity and the maintenance of biodiversity via aquatic‐terrestrial reciprocal fluxes and dynamic interdependence across mosaics. 

Abstract The body size of aquatic vertebrates is declining across populations and ecosystems worldwide owing to warmer water temperature and changing streamflow. In freshwaters, the effects of stream network position and density‐dependent factors on body size are less understood. We used an extensive dataset spanning 41 stream sites over 7 years to evaluate how density‐dependent and density‐independent factors influence the size of two top predators in small watersheds, Coastal Cutthroat TroutOncorhynchus clarkii clarkiiand Coastal Giant SalamandersDicamptodon tenebrosus. We tested three hypotheses of body‐size variation for trout and salamanders, including intraspecific density dependence, interspecific density dependence, and resource availability, using empirical observations in hierarchical linear mixed models in a model‐selection framework. In our best‐supported models, the strongest predictors of size were conspecific negative density dependence, as expected, suggesting greater intraspecific interactions probably owing to conspecific individuals having similar requirements. We reveal a biogeographic pattern in which body size peaks in middle stream‐network positions and plateaus or declines at lower and upper locations, proposing that stream network position also plays a role in determining body size in small watersheds. Salamander density also has a quadratic effect on adult trout size, with salamanders having a greater overall effect on the body size of both species than trout, suggesting that salamanders might be more dominant than trout in some interactions. Collectively, we found that biotic interactions, mainly conspecific but also interspecific, and stream‐network position affect trout and salamander body sizes in small watersheds. 

Abstract As we contemplate the future of forest landscapes under changing climate conditions and land‐use demands, there is increasing value in studying historic forest conditions and how these landscapes have changed following past disturbances. Historic landscape paintings are a potential source of data on preindustrial forests with highly detailed, full‐color depictions of overstory and understory environments. They display key details about forest community composition, microhabitat features, and structural complexity from a time well before the advent of color photography. Despite these paintings' potential, their scientific applications have been impeded by questions of validity. How truly accurate are the images portrayed in these paintings? How much of an image is an artist's manipulation of a scene to best illustrate an allegory or romanticized view of nature? Following an established assessment model from historical ecology for evaluating resource validity, we demonstrate how scholarship on art history can be integrated with ecological understanding of forest landscapes to follow this model and address these questions of image veracity in 19th century American art. Further, to illustrate the potential use of these historic images in ecological studies, we present in a case study assessing microhabitat features of 10 different paintings. While this paper explores 19th century landscape art broadly, we focus our art historical review in particular on Asher Durand, a prolific and influential artist associated with the so‐called “Hudson River School” in the mid‐1800s. Durand left clear records about his perspectives on accurately depicting nature, and from a review of images and writings of Durand, we find support for the potential use of many of his paintings and sketches in historic forest ecology research. However, we also identify important caveats regarding potential ecological interpretations from these images. More broadly, because 19th century landscape paintings are not always directly transcriptive, and because regional art cultures differed in the 1800s, we cannot within this paper speak about landscape image veracity across all 19th century landscape art. However, in following established methods in historical ecology and integrating tools from art history research, we show that one can identify accurate historic landscape paintings for application in scientific studies.