Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, PO Box 423, Warrnambool 3280, Victoria, Australia; Centre for Regional and Rural Futures, Deakin University, Locked Bag 20000, Geelong 3220, Victoria, Australia.
Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, PO Box 423, Warrnambool 3280, Victoria, Australia.
Sci Total Environ. 2018 Mar;616-617:543-553. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.333. Epub 2017 Nov 10.
Ecological research associated with the importance of refuges has tended to focus on natural rather than anthropogenic water bodies. The frequency of disturbances, including drought events, is predicted to increase in many regions worldwide due to human-induced climate change. More frequent disturbance will affect freshwater ecosystems by altering hydrologic regimes, water chemistry, available habitat and assemblage structure. Under this scenario, many aquatic biota are likely to rely on permanent water bodies as refuge, including anthropogenic water bodies. Here, macroinvertebrate and macrophyte assemblages from waste-water treatment and raw-water storages (i.e. untreated potable water) were compared with nearby natural water bodies during autumn and winter 2013. We expected macroinvertebrate and macrophyte assemblages in raw-water storages to be representative of natural water bodies, while waste-water treatment storages would not, due to degraded water quality. However, water quality in natural water bodies differed from raw-water storages but was similar to waste-water treatment storages. Macroinvertebrate patterns matched those of water quality, with no differences occurring between natural water bodies and waste-water treatment storages, but assemblages in raw-water storages differed from the other two water bodies. Unexpectedly, differences associated with raw-water storages were attributable to low abundances of several taxa. Macrophyte assemblages in raw-water storages were representative of natural water bodies, but were less diverse and abundant in, or absent from, waste-water treatment storages. No clear correlations existed between any habitat variables and macroinvertebrate assemblages but a significant correlation between macrophyte assemblages and habitat characteristics existed. Thus, there were similarities in both water quality and macroinvertebrate assemblages between natural water bodies and waste-water treatment storages, and similarities in macrophyte assemblages between raw-water storages and natural water bodies. These similarities illustrate that anthropogenic water storages support representative populations of some aquatic biota across the landscape, and thus, may provide important refuge following disturbance where dispersal capabilities allow.
与避难所重要性相关的生态研究往往侧重于自然水体，而不是人为水体。由于人为气候变化，预计世界许多地区的干扰频率（包括干旱事件）将会增加。更频繁的干扰将通过改变水文状况、水化学、可用栖息地和组合结构来影响淡水生态系统。在这种情况下，许多水生生物可能依赖永久性水体作为避难所，包括人为水体。在这里，2013 年秋季和冬季，比较了废水处理和原水储存（即未处理的饮用水）的大型无脊椎动物和大型植物组合与附近的天然水体。我们预计，由于水质恶化，原水储存中的大型无脊椎动物和大型植物组合将代表天然水体，而废水处理储存则不会。然而，天然水体的水质与原水储存不同，但与废水处理储存相似。大型无脊椎动物模式与水质相匹配，天然水体和废水处理储存之间没有差异，但原水储存中的组合与其他两个水体不同。出乎意料的是，与原水储存相关的差异归因于几个类群的低丰度。原水储存中的大型植物组合代表天然水体，但在废水处理储存中，或不存在，多样性和丰富度较低。原水储存中的大型植物组合与栖息地特征之间存在显著相关性，但与任何栖息地变量之间没有明显相关性。因此，天然水体和废水处理储存之间在水质和大型无脊椎动物组合方面存在相似性，而原水储存和天然水体之间在大型植物组合方面存在相似性。这些相似性表明，人为水体支持景观中一些水生生物的代表性种群，因此，在允许扩散的情况下，在受到干扰后可能提供重要的避难所。
