The Influence of Longitudinal Hydrological Connectivity on Resource Availability and Lower Order Food Web Structure in the Murray River
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The influence of longitudinal hydrological connectivity on resource availability and lower order food web structure in the Murray River A report to the Commonwealth Environmental Water Office Deborah Furst1, Kane Aldridge1, Chris Bice2, Brenton Zampatti2 and Qifeng Ye2 1School of Biological Sciences & Environment Institute, University of Adelaide, 2South Australian Research and Development Institute, Aquatic Sciences March 2019 Disclaimer: The results and comments contained in this report have been provided on the basis that the recipient assumes the sole responsibility for the interpretation and application of them. The authors give no warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or use of the results and comments contained in this report by the recipient or any third party. The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Australian Government or the Minister of the Environment. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that the contents of this publication are factually correct, the Commonwealth does not accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the contents, and shall not be liable for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the contents of this publication. Cite as: Furst D., Aldridge K., Bice C., Zampatti B. and Ye Q. (2019). The influence of flow translucency and connectivity on resource availability and lower order food web structure in the Murray River. A report to the Commonwealth Environmental Water Office, Canberra. 1 | Page Acknowledgments Funding of this project was provided by the Commonwealth Environmental Water Office (CEWO) through the South Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI). We would like to thank SARDI staff members David Short for assistance with field sampling and Luciana Bucater for helping prepare maps/figures. Australian Water Quality Centre conducted water quality and nutrient analysis. Thanks to Irene Wegener and Melissa Head (CEWO) for project management and support to this work. Flow data and background information related to watering actions were provided by the CEWO and the Murray–Darling Basin Authority (MDBA), with assistance from Irene Wegener (CEWO). The authors thank Irene Wegener, Sean Kelly, Alana Wilkes, Andrew Lowes, Brad Hollis and Susan Gehrig for reviewing this report and providing most welcome and constructive feedback. 2 | Page Contents Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................... 2 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 4 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 6 Study Region ........................................................................................................................................... 8 Murray River broad region.................................................................................................................. 8 Hattah Lakes........................................................................................................................................ 9 Methods ................................................................................................................................................ 10 Field Sampling ................................................................................................................................... 10 System-scale sampling .................................................................................................................. 10 Hattah Lakes sampling .................................................................................................................. 11 River hydraulics ................................................................................................................................. 11 Nutrients and phytoplankton ........................................................................................................... 12 Zooplankton ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Results ................................................................................................................................................... 13 Hydrology and Hattah Watering ....................................................................................................... 13 Objective 1 –System Scale ................................................................................................................ 16 Longitudinal nutrient, phytoplankton and zooplankton dynamics in the Murray River .............. 16 Nutrient, phytoplankton and zooplankton dynamics in major tributaries ................................... 25 Objective 2 – Hattah Lakes ............................................................................................................... 30 Discussion.............................................................................................................................................. 33 System scale study ............................................................................................................................ 34 Hattah Lakes return flows ................................................................................................................. 37 Consistencies with central river concepts ........................................................................................ 38 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 40 References ............................................................................................................................................ 42 Additional data ...................................................................................................................................... 45 3 | Page Executive Summary The integrity of riverine food webs relies on synchronised responses across trophic levels to a range of natural cues, mostly driven by flow. Thus, alterations to the natural flow regime can remove natural cues or cause spatially and temporally fragmented responses. In the short term, this may lead to misdirection of energy and decreased productivity, but over a longer term may result in population declines. To mitigate the impacts of river regulation and hydrological alteration in the MDB, the Murray-Darling Basin Plan aims to recover water for the environment. Planning of environmental water delivery often places large emphasis on supplying given volumes of water (i.e. flow magnitude) and inundation of discrete off-channel sites, but patterns of temporal variability, sources of water and riverine hydraulics are also critical components of flow regimes that influence the structure and function of riverine ecosystems. Therefore, contemporary flow management increasingly considers the delivery of environmental water in a manner that reinstates these additional aspects of the natural flow regime. This project aimed to improve understanding of the spatial and temporal influence of the delivery of Commonwealth environmental water on the structure of lower trophic levels of the food web in the Murray River, and the implications of translucent delivery of environmental water. Specifically in 2016–2018, the project characterised large-scale longitudinal patterns in physical (hydraulics), chemical (nutrients) and microbiota (phytoplankton and zooplankton) community structure in association with flow (including Commonwealth environmental water) in the Murray River and key tributaries. Secondly in 2017, we quantified patterns in the aforementioned parameters at a finer spatio-temporal scale with regard to return flows from a specific off-channel watering event. The two key objectives were to: 1. Establish the role of hydraulics and water source in determining nutrient availability and structuring lower trophic levels of the food web along the Murray River and selected tributaries, and 2. Assess the contribution of return flows from Hattah Lakes to riverine productivity in the form of nutrients, phytoplankton and zooplankton. For the first objective, longitudinal trends in nutrients, phytoplankton and zooplankton, were substantially different along the Murray River under different hydrological scenarios and at different times of the year. High spring discharge (~15,000−45,000 ML.day-1 in the Murray River) in 2016 resulted in clear longitudinal trends, high availability of resources, a diatom dominated phytoplankton community and a zooplankton community dominated by diatom consumers. Both of which present a 4 | Page high quality food resource for higher trophic consumers. These results demonstrate that the Murray River was hydrologically and ecologically connected during high flows/flood and the influence of river regulation at its lowest. In comparison, low summer discharge (~5,000−8,500 ML.day-1 in the Murray River) was characterised by high densities of cyanobacteria, and in the lower Murray region, high abundance of the recently introduced rotifer Keratella americana, a species commonly associated