Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Biodiversity Associated with Artificial
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Hydrobiologia DOI 10.1007/s10750-016-2757-z PRIMARY RESEARCH PAPER Aquatic macroinvertebrate biodiversity associated with artificial agricultural drainage ditches M. J. Hill . R. P. Chadd . N. Morris . J. D. Swaine . P. J. Wood Received: 9 November 2015 / Revised: 31 March 2016 / Accepted: 1 April 2016 Ó The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract Agricultural drainage ditches are ubiqui- at both the site (alpha diversity) and landscape scale tous features in lowland agricultural landscapes, built (gamma diversity) with the main arterial drainage primarily to facilitate land drainage, irrigate agricul- ditches supporting greater numbers of taxa when tural crops and alleviate flood risk. Most drainage compared to smaller side ditches. Examination of the ditches are considered artificial waterbodies and are between site community heterogeneity (beta diversity) not typically included in routine monitoring pro- indicated that differences among ditches were high grammes, and as a result the faunal and floral spatially and temporally. The results illustrate that communities they support are poorly quantified. This both main arterial and side ditches make a unique paper characterises the aquatic macroinvertebrate contribution to aquatic biodiversity of the agricultural diversity (alpha, beta and gamma) of agricultural landscape. Given the need to maintain drainage drainage ditches managed by an internal drainage ditches to support agriculture and flood defence board in Lincolnshire, UK. The drainage ditches measures, we advocate the application of principles support very diverse macroinvertebrate communities from ‘reconciliation ecology’ to inform the future management and conservation of drainage ditches. Handling editor: Beat Oertli Keywords Drainage channel Á Invertebrates Á Wetland habitat Á Reconciliation ecology Á Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10750-016-2757-z) contains supple- Conservation Á Species richness mentary material, which is available to authorized users. M. J. Hill Á J. D. Swaine Á P. J. Wood (&) Department of Geography, Centre for Hydrological and Ecosystem Science, Loughborough University, Introduction Loughborough, Leicestershire LE11 3TU, UK e-mail: [email protected] Land drainage improvements across Europe have historically been followed by the large-scale conver- R. P. Chadd Environment Agency of England and Wales, Anglian sion of lowland wetlands to intensive arable produc- Region, Northern Area, Waterside House, Waterside tion. This has resulted in a wide range of documented North, Lincoln, Lincolnshire LN2 5HA, UK changes and adverse effects upon biological commu- nities across terrestrial, riparian and aquatic land- N. Morris Welland and Deepings Internal Drainage Board, Deeping scapes (Buisson et al., 2008; van Eerden et al., 2010). House, Welland Terrace, Spalding PE11 2TD, UK Contemporary European wetlands exist as isolated 123 Hydrobiologia fragments of their former extent, with those that agricultural and flooding alleviation infrastructure. remain largely surrounded by agricultural land (Ver- As a result, unlike other lentic and lotic surface donschot et al., 2011). Wetland habitat loss across waterbodies, their ecology may not be required to be Europe is most likely to continue as agricultural monitored on a regular basis, and there is no obligation intensification, land conversion and water abstraction for them to achieve the WFD requirement of good continue to exert pressure (Maltby & Acreman, 2011). ecological status (GES). Instead, the alternative target Frequently, the only remaining aquatic habitat/refuges of good ecological potential (GEP) is applied to AWB that exist in agricultural landscapes are ponds (e.g., and HMWB. This designation reflects the anthro- Sayer et al., 2012) and drainage ditch networks. pogenic requirements placed upon them, the social and However, the potential importance of drainage ditch economic benefits of the services they provide, and habitats in supporting aquatic biodiversity, the persis- that it may not be practically or economically possible tence of wetland floral or faunal communities, or to modify or change the existing configuration (EU, species of conservation interest, has been poorly 2000; Environment Agency, 2009). quantified internationally to date (Katano et al., Agricultural drainage ditches have typically been 2003; Maltchik et al., 2011, Leslie et al., 2012; Vaikre reported to support lower taxonomic richness compared et al., 2015). with other waterbodies (streams, rivers, lakes and Ditches are defined as man-made channels created ponds), which has been attributed to their close proxim- principally for agricultural purposes, which often ity to intensive agricultural activities and the runoff of follow linear field boundaries, turning at right angles herbicides, pesticides and fertilisers into them, the latter and frequently display little relationship with natural reducing floral richness with knock-on effects on the landscape topography (Davies et al., 2008a). Drainage fauna (e.g., Williams et al., 2003; Davies et al., 2008b). ditches created in lowland agricultural regions often However, a number of case studies have demonstrated occur in dense networks, characterised by larger main the importance of drainage ditches as reservoirs for ditches (arterial drainage channels—where flow is aquatic fauna and flora populations (Goulder, 2008; preferentially conveyed by gravity or by pumping) and Verdonschot et al., 2011; Whatley et al., 2015). A smaller side ditches (smaller channels within which number of studies have also illustrated that drainage water levels can be controlled by the use of weirs and ditches can have significant conservation value, sup- can be isolated from the main arterial channel; Clarke, porting high biodiversity and communities of conserva- 2015). Extensive linear networks of drainage ditches tion value, even in intensively cultivated and managed extend over an estimated 128,000 km in the UK (Clare agricultural landscapes (e.g., Foster et al., 1990; & Edwards, 1983). The primary anthropogenic func- Armitage et al., 2003; Williams et al., 2003). Ditches tion of drainage ditches is to convey water to supporting high taxonomic richness typically occur in agricultural land, to support crop irrigation during areas where historic lowland fen occurred and often have the growing season/dry periods and to divert water continuity with ancient wetlands (Davies et al., 2008b). away from agriculture and urban infrastructure within This paper aims to highlight the aquatic macroin- towns and villages (flood alleviation) during wetter vertebrate biodiversity and conservation value associ- periods. Agricultural drainage ditches are frequently ated with lowland agricultural drainage ditches (large subject to a range of routine management activities main ditches and smaller side ditches) over three including dredging/in-channel vegetation manage- seasons, and to discuss how principles of reconciliation ment and bank vegetation cutting to maintain efficient ecology may provide a sustainable strategy for con- conveyance of water and reduce flood risk (Clarke, serving biodiversity in ditches while supporting their 2015). wider societal and anthropogenic functions. For EU water framework directive (WFD) pur- poses, most drainage ditches are classified as either Materials and methods artificial water bodies (AWB) or as heavily modified water bodies (HMWB) if they follow the course of a Study sites pre-existing watercourse (EU, 2000). Given their importance in supporting the irrigation of crops and Deeping Fen (52.746827°N, 0.24762523°W) is an flood defence, they are managed primarily as area of low-lying, intensively cultivated agricultural 123 Hydrobiologia land encircled by the River Glen and River Welland, from the three sites was calculated within 5 year Lincolnshire, UK. Historically, Deeping Fen was part windows (1989–1993; 1994–1998; 1998–2003 and of 100,000 ha of wild fenland, but as a result of 2004–2008) except the final period which comprised extensive draining for intensive arable agriculture 6 years (2009–2014). Due to variability in the number over several centuries, less than 55 ha of natural of samples within each time period and the sampling fenland remain, representing a loss of 99% (Boyes & technique employed over time only presence/absence Russell, 1977; Wet Fens Partnership, 2015). An data were considered. extensive network of drainage ditches, river embank- ments and water pumping systems operate within the Macroinvertebrate sampling Welland and Deepings Internal Drainage Board area. The drainage ditches are surrounded by intensive Aquatic macroinvertebrate taxa were sampled from arable farming and subject to water level management the margin of each ditch using the sweep-sample with water pumped from the ditches during periods of technique due to the limited flow velocity and depth in high rainfall into the tidal River Welland to reduce excess of 1.5 m with a standard pond net (mesh size flood risk. During the growing season and periods of 1 mm) over a three-minute period (Garcı´a-Criado & low precipitation, water levels in the drainage ditches Trigal, 2005). This allowed a representative sample to are raised through a reduction in pumping, the be obtained whilst also facilitating comparability management of weir boards in side channels to reduce between sites (Murray-Bligh, 1999). Aquatic macroin- the drainage of water and through a series of valves