Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Conservation of ephemeral streams and their ecosystem services: what are we missing?

Conservation of ephemeral streams and their ecosystem services: what are we missing? INTRODUCTION More than thirty years ago when I commenced my PhD research on the ecology of temporary streams, they were seen as something of an oddity. By far, most of the published literature dealt with perennially flowing systems and, not surprisingly, nearly all the conceptual models of river ecosystem function published in the 1980s and 1990s were predicated on rivers that flowed permanently (but see Fisher et al ., ). Also not surprisingly, these conceptual models entered subsequent textbooks and influenced a generation of aquatic ecologists and water resource managers – an influence that persists in many places today and may bias perceptions about temporary stream ecosystems and their ecological significance. In the last decade, there has been an exponential increase in our understanding of the ecology of temporary streams. Several excellent reviews (Larned et al ., ; McDonough et al ., ; Datry et al ., ) have synthesized much of this information, highlighting the ubiquity and biodiversity of naturally temporary waterways and the many benefits to people that these ecosystems provide – their ecosystem services. Furthermore, there have been strident calls for better recognition and protection of temporary streams and rivers (Jacobson and Jacobson, ; Acuña http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems Wiley

Conservation of ephemeral streams and their ecosystem services: what are we missing?

Download PDF
6 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/conservation-of-ephemeral-streams-and-their-ecosystem-services-what-O8D0lihDpX

References (60)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
ISSN
1052-7613
eISSN
1099-0755
DOI
10.1002/aqc.2537
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

INTRODUCTION More than thirty years ago when I commenced my PhD research on the ecology of temporary streams, they were seen as something of an oddity. By far, most of the published literature dealt with perennially flowing systems and, not surprisingly, nearly all the conceptual models of river ecosystem function published in the 1980s and 1990s were predicated on rivers that flowed permanently (but see Fisher et al ., ). Also not surprisingly, these conceptual models entered subsequent textbooks and influenced a generation of aquatic ecologists and water resource managers – an influence that persists in many places today and may bias perceptions about temporary stream ecosystems and their ecological significance. In the last decade, there has been an exponential increase in our understanding of the ecology of temporary streams. Several excellent reviews (Larned et al ., ; McDonough et al ., ; Datry et al ., ) have synthesized much of this information, highlighting the ubiquity and biodiversity of naturally temporary waterways and the many benefits to people that these ecosystems provide – their ecosystem services. Furthermore, there have been strident calls for better recognition and protection of temporary streams and rivers (Jacobson and Jacobson, ; Acuña

Journal

Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems – Wiley

Published: Jan 1, 2014

There are no references for this article.