James A. Perry | USGS Science

USGS2003

Influence of local riparian cover and watershed runoff potential on invertebrate communities in agricultural streams in the Minnesota River Basin

During the summer of 1997, 23 streams in the highly agricultural Minnesota River Basin were studied to determine the influence of local riparian cover conditions (wooded or open) and watershed runoff potential (high or low) on invertebrate community composition. A two by two-factorial analysis of variance was used to determine differences in invertebrate community measures among the design classes While it is difficult to determine the relative influence of watershed runoff potential and local riparian cover, invertebrate communities may be more strongly influenced by local wooded riparian cover than by watershed runoff potential. Invertebrate community measures indicate greater degradation at the open riparian cover, high runoff potential sites and less degradation at the wooded riparian cover, low runoff potential sites. In addition, differences between streams with wooded riparian cover and sites with open riparian cover were greater in watersheds with high runoff potential. The variance explained by riparian cover and runoff potential is relatively independent of other land-use effects. Wooded riparian cover influences invertebrate community composition by its relation to the other physical environmental variables. This study indicates that wooded riparian cover may be effective in maintaining stream biotic integrity in watersheds dominated by agricultural land use.

Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota↗

USGS1989

Use of experimental ecosystems in regulatory decision making

Tiered testing for the effects of chemicals on aquatic ecosystems has begun to include tests at the ecosystem level as a component in pesticide regristration. Because such tests are expensive, regulators and industry need to know what additional information they can gain from such tests relative to the costs of the simpler single-species toxicity bioassays. Requirements for ecosystem-level testing have developed because resource managers have not fully understood the implications of potential damage to resources without having evaluations of the predicted impacts under field conditions. We review approaches taken in the use of experimental ecosystems, discuss benefits and limitations of small- and large-scale ecosystem tests, and point to correlative approaches between laboratory and field toxicity testing. Laboratory experimental ecosystems (microcosms) have been successfully used to measure contaminant bioavailability, to determine routes of uptake in moderately complex aquatic systems, and to isolate factors modifying contaminant uptake into the biota. Such factors cannot be as readily studied in outdoor experimental ecosystems because direct cause-and-effect relations are often confounded and difficult to isolate. However, laboratory tests can be designed to quantify the relations among three variables: known concentrations of Stressors; specific sublethal behavioral, biochemical, and physiological effects displayed by organisms; and responses that have been observed in ecosystem-level analyses. For regulatory purposes, the specificity of test results determines how widely they can be applied. Ecotoxicological research should be directed at attempts to identify instances where single-species testing would be the appropriate level of analysis for identifying critical ecological endpoints and for clarifying relationships between ecosystem structure and function, and where it would be inadequate for a given level of analysis.

Environmental Management↗