Abstract
Abstract
Background
Altered hydrology is a stressor on aquatic life, but quantitative relations between specific aspects of streamflow alteration and biological responses have not been developed on a statewide scale in Minnesota. Best subsets regression analysis was used to develop linear regression models that quantify relations among five categories of hydrologic metrics (i.e., duration, frequency, magnitude, rate-of-change, and timing) computed from streamgage records and six categories of biological metrics (i.e., composition, habitat, life history, reproductive, tolerance, trophic) computed from fish-community samples, as well as fish-based indices of biotic integrity (FIBI) scores and FIBI scores normalized to an impairment threshold of the corresponding stream class (FIBI_BCG4). Relations between hydrology and fish community responses were examined using three hydrologic datasets that represented periods of record, long-term changes, and short-term changes to flow regimes in streams of Minnesota.
Results
Regression models demonstrated significant relations between hydrologic explanatory metrics and fish-based biological response metrics, and the five regression models with the strongest linear relations explained over 70% of the variability in the biological metric using three hydrologic metrics as explanatory variables. Tolerance-based biological metrics demonstrated the strongest linear relations to hydrologic metrics. The most commonly used hydrologic metrics were related to bankfull flows and aspects of flow variability.
Conclusions
Final regression models represent paired streamgage records and biological samples throughout the State of Minnesota and encompass differences in stream orders, hydrologic landscape units, and watershed sizes. Presented methods can support evaluations of stream fish communities and facilitate targeted efforts to improve the health of fish communities. Methods also can be applied to locations outside of Minnesota with continuous streamgage data and fish-community samples.
Funder
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Clean Water Legacy Funds
U.S. Geological Survey Cooperative Match Funds
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Ecological Modeling,Ecology
Reference70 articles.
1. Aertsen W, Kint V, Orshoven J, van Ozkan K, Muys B (2010) Comparison and ranking of different modeling techniques for prediction of site index in Mediterranean mountain forests. Ecol Model 221:1119–1130
2. Annear T, Chisholm I, Beecher H, Locke A, Aarrestad P, Coomer C, Estes C, Hunt J, Jacobson R, Jobsis G, Kauffman J, Marshall J, Mayes K, Smith G, Wentworth R (2004) Instream flows for riverine resource stewardship (revised edition). Instream Flow Council, Cheyenne, WY, USA, 268 p.
3. Archfield SA, Kennen JG, Carlisle DM, Wolock DM (2014) An objective and parsimonious approach for classifying natural flow regimes at a continental scale. River Res App 30:1166–1183. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.2710
4. Breen R (1996) Regression models: censored, sample selected, or truncated data: Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07–111, Thousand Oaks, CA
5. Breusch TS, Pagan AR (1979) A simple test for heteroskedasticity and random coefficient variation. Econometrica 47(5):1287–1294. https://doi.org/10.2307/1911963.JSTOR1911963.MR0545960
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献