The Riverine Ecosystem Synthesis:A Conceptual Model and Research FrameworkA Conceptual Model and Research Framework

Prof. James H. ThorpProf. James H. ThorpKansas Biological Survey and

Dept. of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of Kansas, Lawrence, KS USA

Missouri River inthe eastern Great Plains

“Jayhawk”: indigenousto tall grass prairies

Murray River,Australia

Prof. Martin Thoms*Univ. of Canberra, Australia

fluvial geomorphologist*[alias: Tarmac Thoms“]

Prof. Michael Delong*Winona State Univ., USA

community/ecosystem ecologist*[alias: “Koala Mike”]

Vic Hughes*Univ. of Canberra

ecogeomorphologist*[alias “The Steak”]

Seminar based on:Seminar based on:• 2003 seminar in Albury by Thorp• 2006 RRA public. by Thorp, Thoms & Delong• late summer (?) 2007 book by TT&D

[blatant advertisement!]

www.utexas.edu/.../grg/adams/quebtour/fjord2.jpg

Sagenay River, Quebec

Snake River & Grand TetonsWyoming, USAAnsel Adams, 1942

•• hydrogeomorphichydrogeomorphic patch modelpatch model•• research framework: HPD for rivers research framework: HPD for rivers •• 17 testable, model tenets17 testable, model tenets

RiverineRiverine Ecosystem SynthesisEcosystem Synthesis (RES):

3 River Perspectives in 3 River Perspectives in 100+100+ Years Years www.discoverlife.org

Longitudinally Ordered Zones Longitudinally Ordered Zones (1900(1900--1980)1980)• Fixed, non-repeating zones in predictable locations

ClinalClinal Perspective Perspective (1980 (1980 -- ))• Continuous gradient and predictable locations • River Continuum Concept (RCC)

WWF photo

HydrogeomorphicHydrogeomorphic Patches Patches (~ this decade)(~ this decade)• Non-continuous and repeatable patches• Location of patches only partially predictable• Reach-to-valley scale hydrogeomorphic patches

termed “functional process zones” (FPZs)• Riverine Ecosystem Synthesis (RES)

brown trout (Salmo trutta)

Illinois DNR

barbel (Barbus barbus)

www.europareservat.de

grayling (Thymallus thymallus)

www.europareservat.de

bream (Abramis brarna)

www.europareservat.de

• fixed, non-repeating zones in predictable locations• biotically designated & secondarily linked to hydrogeomorphology• linear perspective with somewhat abrupt transitions

Longitudinally Ordered ZonesLongitudinally Ordered Zones

ClinalClinal PerspectivePerspective

Vannote et al. 1980. The river continuum concept.Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 37:130-137.

Continuous gradient of physicalconditions from headwaters toa river’s mouth(overall trends interrupted onlyslightly and temporarily bytribs and geological features )

Linear model

Continuous biotic adjustments in community structure(except where temporarilyreset, such as by tributaries)

• basis: hydrogeomorphic patches

• scale: between valley and reach

• features: vary in hydrologicalpatterns, geomorphic nature,and dimensional complexity

• boundaries: defined statisticallyusing common techniques influvial geomorphology

• frequency: FPZs are repeatable

• position predictability: decreaseswith increasing spatial scale(especially above ecoregion)

• ecological responses: a site’slongitudinal position is lessimportant to ecosystemstructure and function thanthe type of FPZ in that area

Functional Process Zones (Functional Process Zones (FPZsFPZs))

Functional Process Zones

example of an FPZ appearing repeatedlybut not necessarily predictably

constrained upland

middle mobile

meandering lowland anabranch lowland

Temporal scales of hydrologyREGIME (>100 years)

HISTORY (1-100 years)

PULSE (<1 year)400

0

800

1200

1600

1973 1975 19791977 1981 1983

Flow

Year

200400

600

800

1000

1200

J F M A M J J A OS N D

Flow

Month

1900 1950 20000

400

800

1200

1600

2000

Flow

Year

Slide from Martin Thomson Murray-Darling system

Arkansas River: Research, Monitoring & Management

Current Monitoring StrategyCurrent Monitoring Strategy• stratified random whole river (rare)• modified for reservoir presence• stratified random w/in political lines• clustered at boundary edges

Hydrogeomorphic Hydrogeomorphic MonitoringMonitoring• strata size unequal but same # of sites• shown w/ physiographic provinces• ideally based hydrogeomorphic patches• using FPZs, more sites would be shown

Background map from MSN Encarta

• framework for studying the entire river network using HPD• spatial and temporal components are important• small to large scale patterns and processes• includes all 4 river dimensions

• a true synthesis: based on publications from 1980-presentmixed with our original ideas

• conceptual model applicable to pristine and working rivers(for the latter, see our book)

• synthesis is heuristic and model designed to be testable

• 17 model tenets (more are possible) ….

RiverineRiverine Ecosystem SynthesisEcosystem Synthesis(a summary)(a summary)

• Tenet 1: Hydrogeomorphic Patches• Tenet 2: Importance of FPZ Over Clinal Position• Tenet 3: Ecological Nodes• Tenet 4: Hydrologic Retention

• Tenet 5: Hierarchical Habitat Template• Tenet 6: Deterministic vs Stochastic Factors• Tenet 7: Quasi-Equilibrium• Tenet 8: Trophic Complexity• Tenet 9: Succession

• Tenet 10: Primary Productivity Within FPZs• Tenet 11: Riverscape Food Web Pathways• Tenet 12: Floodscape Food Web Pathways• Tenet 13: Nutrient Spiraling• Tenet 14: Dynamic Hydrology• Tenet 15: Flood-Linked Evolution• Tenet 16: Connectivity• Tenet 17: Landscape Patterns of FPZs

Subject Categories of our 17 Model Tenets (from journal article Subject Categories of our 17 Model Tenets (from journal article and book)and book)Distribution of Species (4)Distribution of Species (4)

Community Regulation (5)Community Regulation (5)

Ecosystem and Ecosystem and Riverine Riverine Landscape Processes (8)Landscape Processes (8)

*

*

*

Model Tenet 2: Model Tenet 2: Importance of FPZ Over Importance of FPZ Over ClinalClinal PositionPosition

Community diversity and the distributions of species and ecotypesfrom headwaters to a river’s mouth primarily reflect the nature ofthe functional process zone rather than a clinal position along thelongitudinal dimension of the river network.

Missouri River

Clinal (RCC)Perspective

Problems with This View ofFunctional Feeding Groups:• based on insects (e.g, ignores fish)• not supported by stable isotope data• ignores organisms in slackwaters

RES Perspective:• diversity of ecotypes tied to position

in and complexity of the FPZ

• ecotypes more similar to those insimilar FPZ than in adjacentpatches upstream or downstream

• lateral complexity brings in ecotypesfrom other areas (stream orders)

• food sources differ from RCC & thusecotypes not always as predicted

www.d.umn.edu/~seawww/depth/rivers/02.html

Model Tenet 4: Model Tenet 4: Hydrologic RetentionHydrologic Retention

Overall community complexity varies directly:

• with the diversity of hydrologic habitats in afunctional process zone, and

• with hydrologic retention until other abioticenvironmental conditions (e.g., oxygen,temperature, substrate type, and nutrientavailability) become restrictive.

• Emphasizes lateral vs longitudinal dimension

Upper Mississippi River

Examples of Examples of Slackwaters Slackwaters (retention(retentionzones) in Great Plains Riverszones) in Great Plains Rivers

slackwaters

temporarysand bar island

agricultural field riparian zone

Kansas RiverKansas River

Current Velocity (m/s)0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

Rot

ifer

Den

sity

(#/L

)

0

10

20

30

40

50 Rotifer Density in the Kansas River (July only) Linear Regression

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

Cru

stac

ean

Den

sity

(#/L

)

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5 Crustacean Density in the Kansas River (July - Sept) Linear Regression

B

A

y = -55.016x + 34.19R2 = 0.4725

y = -0.36x + 0.19R2 = 0.1778

Thorp, J.H. and S. Mantovani. (2005) Zooplankton in turbid and hydrologicallydynamic, prairie rivers. Freshwater Biol.

Facts:Facts:1.1. Globally, most large rivers are heterotrophic (P/R < 1);Globally, most large rivers are heterotrophic (P/R < 1);2.2. Therefore, some amount of Therefore, some amount of allochthonousallochthonous C is needed.C is needed.

HeterotrophyParadox

Question:Question: ““How can river autotrophic production be theHow can river autotrophic production be themost important source of C to food webs ???most important source of C to food webs ???””

Clinal Clinal Perspective onPerspective onFood ResourcesFood Resources

terrestrial CPOMin forested headwaters

instream production(macrophytes & benthic algae)in mid-order streams

In large rivers: FPOM from upstream (original RCC)or floodscape (Junk et al. 1989 and1989 revision of the RCC)

Model Tenet 11: Riverscape Food Web Pathways

Summary #11 (a): Majority of metazoan productivityderived from instream algae, with some seasonaland locational exceptions.

Summary #11 (b): Decomposer pathway based on bothallochthonous and autochthonous organic matterin a microbial-viral loop primarily produces P/R < 1.

caddisflycaddisfly caddisfliescaddisflies & native mussel& native mussel

caddisfliescaddisflies

beetle, beetle, caddisflycaddisfly, mayfly, , mayfly, midge & exotic musselmidge & exotic mussel

mayfly, amphipod,mayfly, amphipod,isopod & snailsisopod & snails

snailsnail

Carbon SourcesCarbon Sources C:N Ratios

Terrestrial Carbon Terrestrial Carbon (in general)(in general) > 12Aquatic Carbon Aquatic Carbon (in general)(in general) < 12

***C:N ratios indicate a primarily autochthonousorigin for living and detrital POM (summer study).

Fine Transported Organic Matter (Fine TOM)Fine Transported Organic Matter (Fine TOM)FTOM living (phytoplankton) 6.55FTOM detritus (dead algae & terrestrial C) 9.76

UltraUltra--fine Transported Organic Matter *fine Transported Organic Matter *UTOM living (phytoplankton) 6.56UTOM detritus (probably mostly dead algae) 6.87

Delong and Thorp. 2006. Oecologia

TerrestrialMacrophytes TOMD TOMA

CheumatopsychePotamyia

HydrobiidaePleuroceraAsellusTricorythodes

Pycnosyche DreissenaStenelmisStenonemaChironomidae

OligochaetaUnionoideaPhysellaGammarus

BenthicAlgae

Hydropsyche

<10% 10 – 25% 26 – 40% 41 – 60% >61%

cDOM

AllochthonousCarbon

Carbon Loss: Downstream

Export

Carbon Loss:Respiration

[Recycling WithinMicrobial Loop]

Aquatic DecomposerAquatic DecomposerFood PathwayFood Pathway

HeterotrophicBacteria & Fungi

Heterotrophic FlagellatesCiliates

Rotifers “Microbial-Viral Loop”

Viruses

Supported by Supported by current isotopecurrent isotopedata worldwidedata worldwide

RequiresRequiresfuture studiesfuture studies

**

AlgalAlgal--GrazerGrazerFood PathwayFood Pathway

AutotrophicAutochthonous

Carbon

Herbivores

InvertebrateCarnivores

PlanktivorousFish

Piscivorous Fish &Other Vertebrates

InvertivorousFish

Carbon Loss to:- respiration,- microbial loop-invertebrate

decomposers-downstream

transport

MetazoanMetazoandetritivoresdetritivores

RCC & FPCRCC & FPCemphasisemphasis

www.golfmontana.net

The ~ Pristine Flathead River of Montana

Pristine Pristine Lotic Lotic Ecosystems Are Becoming Increasingly RareEcosystems Are Becoming Increasingly Rare

3 Gorges Dam, China

Hoover Dam, USA

Upper Mississippi lowhead dam

Ohio River lowhead dam

Examples of Effects of Examples of Effects of ChannelizationChannelizationon Model Tenets of the RESon Model Tenets of the RES

Examples of Effects of Examples of Effects of ChannelizationChannelizationon Model Tenets of the RESon Model Tenets of the RES

• destruction of basic nature of the FPZ

• loss of hydrologic retention areasand homogenization of the river

• reduce potential importance ofdeterministic factors and quasi-equilibrium

• shift in type and importance of autotrophs

• disruption of succession processes

• loss of connection with floodscape

• increased nutrient spiraling length

• elimination of species requiring slackwatersin the riverscape and floodscape… etc.

A Goal in A Goal in LoticLotic Ecology:Ecology:““Conceptual CohesivenessConceptual Cohesiveness””

Riverine Ecosystem SynthesisA challenging journey

into the future!

[of Lotic Ecology]

Photo from:www.solstation.com/life.htm

One earth,

Many rivers,

One global river society….

International Society for River ScienceInternational Society for River ScienceFor information on ISRScontact me here in Canberra or Alburyor write me at thorp@ku.edu