4.1 Article

The effects of urbanization on trophic relationships in constructed wetlands

Journal

FRESHWATER SCIENCE
Volume 36, Issue 1, Pages 138-150

Publisher

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/690674

Keywords

constructed wetlands; total imperviousness; macroinvertebrates; fish; food web; stable isotope analysis

Funding

  1. Australian Geographic
  2. Holsworth Wildlife Endowment
  3. Monash University
  4. School of Biological Sciences, Monash University
  5. ARC Future Fellowship [FT110100957]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Constructed stormwater wetlands are one strategy for mitigating the negative effects of urbanization on aquatic ecosystems. However, the biotic community in these wetlands generally is dominated by organisms able to tolerate poor water quality. Reduced macroinvertebrate diversity and abundance in comparison to natural wetlands, and prevalence of invasive species, such as Gambusia, can influence the flow of energy through food webs. We used stable -isotope analysis (813C and 8'5N) of food webs to assess whether the amount of catchment urbanization (total imperviousness [imperviousness] = % catchment covered in impervious surfaces) influenced basal resources and trophic relationships in constructed wetlands in Melbourne, Australia. As imperviousness increased, the abundance and diversity of macroinvertebrates decreased significantly and the values of 813C and 815N recorded for fishes and macroinvertebrates increased significantly. An increase in imperviousness was associated with a decrease in the mean trophic position of fishes and an increase in the mean trophic position of macroinvertebrates. Our results suggest that sources of C differed between sites of low and high imperviousness and that N sources increased with increasing imperviousness. Our study provides an understanding of the likely consequences of disturbance associated with urbanization on the foodweb structure of constructed wetlands.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available