The effect of peatland drainage and restoration on Odonata species richness and abundance

Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Merja Elo¹  Jouni Penttinen²  Janne S Kotiaho¹ 

[1] Department of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä 40014, Finland

[2] Natural Heritage Service of Metsähallitus, Jyväskylä FIN-40101, Finland

关键词: Biodiversity;    Dragonfly;    Mire;    Disturbance;    Ecological restoration;   

Others  :  1175301
DOI  :  10.1186/s12898-015-0042-z

 received in 2015-01-27, accepted in 2015-03-16,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Restoration aims at reversing the trend of habitat degradation, the major threat to biodiversity. In Finland, more than half of the original peatland area has been drained, and during recent years, restoration of some of the drained peatlands has been accomplished. Short-term effects of the restoration on peatland hydrology, chemistry and vegetation are promising but little is known about how other species groups apart from vascular plants and bryophytes respond to restoration efforts.

Results

Here, we studied how abundance and species richness of Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies) respond to restoration. We sampled larvae in three sites (restored, drained, pristine) on each of 12 different study areas. We sampled Odonata larvae before restoration (n = 12), during the first (n = 10) and the third (n = 7) year after restoration and used generalized linear mixed models to analyze the effect of restoration. Drained sites had lower abundance and species richness than pristine sites. During the third year after restoration both abundance and species richness had risen in restored sites.

Conclusions

Our results show that Odonata suffer from drainage, but seem to benefit from peatland restoration and are able to colonize newly formed water pools already within three years after restoration.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Elo et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Pimm SL, Raven P: Extinction by numbers. Nature 2000, 403:843-5.
• [2]Sala OE, Chapin FS, Armesto JJ, Berlow E, Dirzo R, Bloomfield J, et al.: Biodiversity - global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science 2000, 287:1770-4.
• [3]Foley JA, Defries R, Asner GP, Carol B, Gordon B, Carpenter SR, et al.: Global consequences of land use. Science 2005, 309:570-4.
• [4]Hooper DU, Adair EC, Cardinale BJ, Jarrett EK B, Hungate BA, Matulich KL, et al.: A global synthesis reveals biodiversity loss as a major driver of ecosystem change. Nature 2012, 486:105-8.
• [5]MacDougalla S, McCann KS, Gellner G, Turkington R: Diversity loss with persistent human disturbance increases vulnerability to ecosystem collapse. Nature 2013, 494:86-9.
• [6]CBD. Convention on Biological Diversity Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020. Conference of the Parties, Nagoya. 2010. http://www.cbd.int/sp/ (accessed April 2014).
• [7]Dobson AP, Bradshaw AD, Baker AJM: Hopes for the future: restoration ecology and conservation biology. Science 1997, 277:515-22.
• [8]Peatlands and climate change. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä; 2008.
• [9]Finnish Forest Research Institute. Finnish Statistical yearbook of Forestry 2013, Metsäntutkimuslaitos. 2013. http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/metsatilastollinenvsk/indexen.htm
• [10]The 2010 Red list of Finnish species. Ympäristöministeriö and Suomen Ympäristökeskus, Helsinki; 2010.
• [11]Laine J, Vanha-Majamaa I: Vegetation ecology along a trophic gradient on drained pine mires in southern Finland. Ann Bot Fenn 1992, 29:213-33.
• [12]Haapalehto TO, Vasander H, Jauhiainen S, Tahvanainen T, Kotiaho JS: The effects of peatland restoration on water-table depth, elemental concentrations, and vegetation: 10 years of changes. Restor Ecol 2011, 19:587-98.
• [13]Haapalehto T, Kotiaho JS, Matilainen R, Tahvanainen T: The effects of long-term drainage and subsequent restoration on water table level and pore water chemistry in boreal peatlands. J Hydrol 2014, 519:1493-505.
• [14]Laiho R, Sallantaus T, Laine J: The effect of forestry drainage on vertical distributions of major plant nutrients in peat soils. Plant Soil 1999, 207:169-81.
• [15]Laine J, Vasander H, Laiho R: Long-term effects of water level drawdown on the vegetation of drained pine mires in southern Finland. J Appl Ecol 1995, 32:785-802.
• [16]Hedberg P, Kotowski W, Saetre P, Kalle M, Håkan R, Sebastian S, et al.: Vegetation recovery after multiple-site experimental fen restorations. Biol Conserv 2012, 147:60-7.
• [17]Jauhiainen S, Laiho R, Vasander H: Ecohydrological and vegetational changes in a restored bog and fen. Annales Botanici Fennici 2002, 39:185-99.
• [18]Laine AM, Leppälä M, Tarvainen O, Päätalo M-L, Seppänen R, Tolvanen A: Restoration of managed pine fens: effect on hydrology and vegetation. Appl Veg Sci 2011, 14:340-9.
• [19]Mälson K, Backéus I, Rydin H: Long-term effects of drainage and initial effects of hydrological restoration on rich fen vegetation. Appl Veg Sci 2008, 11:99-106.
• [20]Sahlén G, Ekestubbe K: Identification of dragonflies (Odonata) as indicators of general species richness in boreal forest lakes. Biodivers Conserv 2001, 10:673-90.
• [21]Butler RG, deMaynadier PG: The significance of littoral and shoreline habitat integrity to the conservation of lacustrine damselflies (Odonata). J Insect Conserv 2008, 12:23-36.
• [22]Oertli B: The use of dragonflies in the assessment and monitoring of aquatic habitats. In Dragonflies damselflies model Org Ecol. Evol. Res. Edited by Córdoba-Aquilar A. Oxford University Press, Oxford; 2008:79-95.
• [23]Bonifait S, Villard M-A: Efficiency of buffer zones around ponds to conserve odonates and songbirds in mined peat bogs. Ecography 2010, 33:913-20.
• [24]Silva DDP, De Marco P, Resende DC: Adult odonate abundance and community assemblage measures as indicators of stream ecological integrity: a case study. Ecol Indic 2010, 10:744-52.
• [25]Simaika JP, Samways MJ: Comparative assessment of indices of freshwater habitat conditions using different invertebrate taxon sets. Ecol Indic 2011, 11:370-8.
• [26]Kutcher TE, Bried JT: Adult Odonata conservatism as an indicator of freshwater wetland condition. Ecol Indic 2014, 38:31-9.
• [27]D’Amico FD, Darblade S, Avignon S, Blanc-Manel S, Ormerod SJ: Odonates as indicators of shallow lake restoration by liming: comparing adult and larval responses. Restor Ecol 2004, 12:439-46.
• [28]Kadoya T, Suda S, Nishihiro J, Washitani I: Procedure for predicting the trajectory of species recovery based on the nested species pool information: dragonflies in a wetland restoration site as a case study. Restor Ecol 2008, 16:397-406.
• [29]Mabry C, Dettman C: Odonata richness and abundance in relation to vegetation structure in restored and native wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region, USA. Ecol Restor 2010, 28:475-84.
• [30]Magoba RN, Samways MJ: Recovery of benthic macroinvertebrate and adult dragonfly assemblages in response to large scale removal of riparian invasive alien trees. J Insect Conserv 2010, 14:627-36.
• [31]Karjalainen S: The dragonflies of Finland (revised edition). Tammi, Helsinki; 2010.
• [32]Wildermuth H: Dragonflies recognize the water of rendezvous and oviposition sites by horizontally polarized light: a behavioural field test. Naturwissenschaften 1998, 85:297-302.
• [33]Corbet PS: Dragonflies: behaviour and ecology of odonata (revised edition). Harley Books, Colchester, UK; 2004.
• [34]Johansson F, Brodin T: Effects of fish predators and abiotic factors on dragonfly communnity structure. J Freshw Ecol 2003, 18:415-23.
• [35]Eriksson MOG, Henrikson L, Nilsson BI, Nyman G, Oscarson HG, Stenson AE, et al.: Predator–prey relations important for the biotic changes in acidified lakes. Ambio 1980, 9:248-9.
• [36]Bendell BE, McNicol DK: Fish predation, lake acidity and the composition of aquatic insect assemblages. Hydrobiologia 1987, 150:193-202.
• [37]Buchwald R: Vegetation and dragonfly fauna - characteristics and examples of biocenological field studies. Vegetatio 1992, 101:99-107.
• [38]Sahlén G: The impact of forestry on dragonfly diversity in Central Sweden. Int J Odonatol 1999, 2:177-86.
• [39]Keil P, Simova I, Hawkins BA: Water-energy and the geographical species richness pattern of European and North African dragonflies (Odonata). Insect Conserv Divers 2008, 1:142-50.
• [40]Honkanen M, Sorjanen A-M, Mönkkönen M: Deconstructing responses of dragonfly species richness to area, nutrients, water plant diversity and forestry. Oecologia 2011, 166:457-67.
• [41]Jonsen ID, Taylor PD: Fine-scale movement behaviors of calopterygid damselflies are influenced by landscape structure: an experimental manipulation. Oikos 2000, 88:553-62.
• [42]Gotelli NJ, Colwell RK: Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecol Lett 2001, 4:379-91.
• [43]Raebel EM, Merckx T, Riordan P, Macdonald DW, Thompson DJ: The dragonfly delusion: why it is essential to sample exuviae to avoid biased surveys. J Insect Conserv 2010, 14:523-33.
• [44]Norling U, Sahlén G. Odonata, dragonflies and damselflies. The aquatic insects of North Europe: a taxonomic handbook, Vol 2. Apollo Books, Stenstrup. 1997.
• [45]Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Walker NJ, Saveliev AA, Smith GM: Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer science + business media. LLC, New York, N.Y; 2009.
• [46]Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker, S. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1-7. 2014. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4.
• [47]Magurran AE: Measuring Biological Diversity. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK; 2003.