Conceptual Evaluation of Factors Potentially Affecting Restoration of Habitat Structure within the Channelized Kissimmee River Ecosystem

A critical element of the ongoing effort to restore the ecological integrity of Florida's Kissimmee River ecosystem is the reestablishment of pre-channelization habitat structure and function. Restoration of habitat will form the basis for responses by most biological components of the ecosystem and will provide a key indicator of the success of the restoration effort. This paper evaluates the relative importance of a range of abiotic and biotic habitat parameters in the existing and historic Kissimmee River ecosystem and provides a conceptual framework for predicting expected spatial and temporal responses of river and floodplain habitats to the restoration project. Among the ecological factors and process that influenced the development, dynamics, and maintenance of river and floodplain habitat structure, hydrology is expected to be of central importance in eliciting restoration responses in the Kissimmee River Ecosystem. Based on the assumption that the restoration plan will reestablish historic hydrologic characteristics, predictions are made of expected responses by geomorphic and vegetative components of the Kissimmee River's habitat structure. Recommendations are made regarding key habitat parameters requiring long term tracking and analysis and utilization of a geographic information system(GIS). A hierarchical habitat classification scheme is provided as a foundation for all components of the restoration evaluation program.     

An Ecosystem View of the Restoration of the Kissimmee River

Restoration of the Kissimmee River and floodplain ultimately will involve restoring 70 km of river channel and riparian zone and 11,000 ha of wetland over a period of two decades. Restoring ecosystem integrity is a crucial goal of the project, and the evaluation program is designed to assess the success of this endeavor. Major components of the riverine and floodplain ecosystem will be evaluated, guided by conceptual models of their structure and function. These studies will be referenced to historic conditions of the past and to present-day conditions in the channelized system. Enhanced connectivity and interactions between the river and floodplain, the interplay of abiotic and biotic variables, and interactions between trophic levels will restructure the channelized river and the largely drained floodplain that now exist. The key to evaluating the success of this ambitious project will be selecting measurements of the structure and function of the river and floodplain ecosystems that are responsive to this large-scale manipulation. The timing and duration of floodplain inundation, improved dissolved oxygen conditions, germination and establishment of wetland vegetation, and enhancement and expansion of rheophilic benthic invertebrate populations are critical initial elements of restoration. Further expected outcomes are an increase in the primary productivity of the ecosystem, expansion of the fish community into the reopened channels and onto the reflooded floodplain, and improved visitation and use by waterbirds in the restored regions. We highlight predictions of some of these key linkages and primary structural and functional attributes of the restored river and floodplain that should be measured.     

An Historical Perspective on the Kissimmee River Restoration Project

This paper reviews the events leading to the channelization of the Kissimmee River, the physical, hydrologic, and biological effects of channelization, and the restoration movement. Between 1962 and 1971, in order to provide flood control for central and southern Florida, the 166 km-long meandering Kissimmee River was transformed into a 90 km-long, 10 meter-deep, 100 meter-wide canal. Channelization and transformation of the Kissimmee River system into a series of impoundments resulted in the loss of 12,000–14,000 ha of wetland habitat, eliminated historic water level fluctuations, and greatly modified flow characteristics. As a result, the biological communities of the river and floodplain system (vegetation, invertebrate, fish, wading bird, and waterfowl) were severely damaged. Following completion of the canal, the U.S. Geological Survey released a report documenting the environmental concerns associated with channelization of the river. This action led to the 1971 Governor's Conference on Water Management in South Florida that produced a consensus to request that steps be taken to restore the fish and wildlife resources and habitat of the Kissimmee basin. In 1976, the Florida Legislature passed the Kissimmee River Restoration Act. As a result, three major restoration and planning studies (first federal feasibility study [1978–1985], the Pool B Demonstration Project [1984–1990], and the second federal feasibility study [1990-present] were initiated (1) to evaluate measures and provide recommendations for restoring flood-plain wetlands and improving water quality within the Kissimmee basin, (2) to assess the feasibility of the recommended dechannelization plan, and (3) to evaluate implementation of the dechannelization plan. The recommended plan calls for the backfilling of over 35 km of C-38, recarving of 14 km of river channel, and removal of two water-control structures and associated levees. Restoration of the Kissimmee River ecosystem will result in the reestablishment of 104 km² of river-floodplain ecosystem, including 70 km of river channel and 11,000 ha of wetland habitat, which is expected to benefit over 320 species of fish and wildlife.     

Restoration of the Kissimmee River: A Conceptual Model of Past and Present Fish Communities and Its Consequences for Evaluating Restoration Success

Efforts to restore fish communities of the Kissimmee River will require carefully defined criteria for assessing success. A goal of regaining communities mirroring those in the historical river may not be an appropriate target because the ecological conditions of the river before channelization are poorly known. The Kissimmee River is in a biogeographic region historically low in fish diversity, and no comparable rivers in that region remain substantially unaltered by human activity to permit their use as reference sites indicative of conditions in the Kissimmee before channelization. I propose alternative criteria for assessing restoration success emphasizing expectations for ecosystem function in similar floodplain rivers. Assessing ecosystem function will be less simple than assessing criteria such as fish condition or density of selected species. But criteria based solely on fish-population characteristics cannot be justified quantitatively. Information integrated from several levels of biotic organization (individuals, populations, communities, and systems) should be drawn upon in making conclusions about restoration success. I develop a conceptual model to outline aspects of ecosystem function that could serve as a basis for evaluation of the restoration of fish communities of the Kissimmee River. The model focuses on the dynamics of the flux of floodplain-channel nutrients and the movement of larvae, juvenile, and adult fishes and macroinvertebrates. The present community may be dominated more by species tolerant of low-oxygen conditions, such as gar and bowfin, than the restored community will be. I propose that nest sites may be the limiting recruitment success of substrate spawning species in the channelized river and that these species, including sunfish and large-mouth bass, will increase in abundance after restoration. Also, species relying on floodplain habitats, including sun-fish species, darters, and some minnows, may also increase in frequency with restoration of floodplain-channel hydro-logical conditions and habitats. The observation that no species are known to have disappeared from the Kissimmee River, and its relatively simple community structure compared to rivers of comparable size elsewhere, are encouraging for prospects of successful restoration.     

Interim Response of Wading Birds (Pelecaniformes and Ciconiiformes) and Waterfowl (Anseriformes) to the Kissimmee River Restoration Project,Florida, U.S.A

Success of the Kissimmee River Restoration Project will be evaluated in part by monitoring populations of wading birds (Pelecaniformes and Ciconiiformes) and waterfowl (Anseriformes). These two waterbird guilds were integral components of the pre‐channelization river–floodplain ecosystem, and both declined substantially following channelization. Restoration is expected to attract wading birds and waterfowl by reintroducing naturally fluctuating water levels, seasonal hydroperiods, and historic vegetation communities. Post‐construction aerial surveys (November 2001 to May 2008) within the Phase I restoration area indicate that the abundance and species richness of both wading birds and waterfowl have shown a positive restoration response thus far. Dry season abundance of aquatic wading birds and waterfowl has exceeded restoration expectations (≥30.6 birds/km² and ≥3.9 birds/km², respectively) each year since the completion of restoration Phase I in 2001. While there has been a significant positive restoration effect on waterfowl abundance, waterfowl species richness (n = 6) has not yet reached the restoration expectation of ≥13 species. Abundance of the terrestrial cattle egret (Bubulcus ibis), which increased dramatically after the majority of floodplain wetlands were converted to cattle pastures in the channelized system, has shown a significant negative response to restoration. It is anticipated that completion of the remaining phases of restoration (II/III), and implementation of the Kissimmee River Headwaters Revitalization water regulation schedule by 2019, will further increase and improve habitat for wading birds and waterfowl by reestablishing floodplain hydrology that more closely mimics historical conditions.     

The Kissimmee River Restoration Project and Evaluation Program,Florida, U.S.A.

Over the past decade, restoration of the Kissimmee River in central Florida has received considerable attention from local, state, national, and international media. In terms of areal extent, project cost, and ecological evaluation it is one of the largest and most comprehensive river restoration projects in the world. The goal of reestablishing ecological integrity involves restoring the physical attributes and the hydrologic processes that were lost after channelization of the river in the 1960s. The project is expected to restore over 80 km² of floodplain wetlands and reestablish over 70 km of river channel. Restoration construction began in 1999; to date, three construction phases have been completed, with the final phase of construction slated for completion in 2019. Restoration evaluation is widely viewed as a critical component of any restoration project. Equally important is the dissemination of information gained from restoration evaluation programs. This introductory article presents a brief overview of project history and outlines the approach and logic of the Kissimmee River Restoration Evaluation Program. The following papers present the results of ecological studies conducted before and after completion of the first phase of restoration construction. This first phase reestablished flow through 23 km of reconnected river channels and seasonally inundated a large portion (approximately 2,900 ha) of the floodplain within the Phase I project area. Although these studies present interim responses prior to full hydrologic restoration, results suggest that the ecosystem is responding largely as predicted by performance measures developed prior to restoration construction.     

Piscivore Responses to Enhancement of the Channelized Kissimmee River,Florida, U.S.A.

Evaluation of the success of ecosystem restoration projects requires identification of appropriate ecological metrics. Comparison of reconstructed food webs (or subsets thereof) from restored and non‐restored habitats may be a valuable tool to evaluate restoration success because food webs help identify critical predator–prey relationships, keystone species, relative importance of direct and indirect trophic interactions, and other aspects of ecological function. We compared the diets of apex predatory fishes collected from enhanced and non‐enhanced portions of the channelized Kissimmee River, Florida, USA to determine whether food web structure responded to experimental hydrologic manipulations. Diets were reconstructed for black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus), bowfin (Amia calva), chain pickerel (Esox niger), Florida gar (Lepisosteus platyrhincus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), and warmouth (Lepomis gulosus) collected from enhanced and non‐enhanced portions of the Kissimmee River. Prey eaten by apex predatory fishes in the enhanced portion of the Kissimmee River were quantitatively and qualitatively different from prey eaten in non‐enhanced portions of the river. Predators in the enhanced portion of the river had fewer empty stomachs, more prey items per individual, more prey types per individual, more fish prey per individual, greater overall richness of prey, and a multivariate suite of prey distinct from predators in non‐enhanced portions of the river. Results from hydrologic manipulations suggest that large‐scale restoration of hydrologic linkages between the main channel and floodplain habitats will positively affect food web structure and ecosystem function in the Kissimmee River.     

Biodiversity in the Lower Rhine and Meuse river-floodplains: Its significance for ecological river management

The diversity of aquatic biota in two large river systems of The Netherlands,viz. the Lower Rhine and Meuse, is discussed in order to: (1) reveal historical changes in biodiversity; (2) examine the role of river-floodplain connectivity; (3) set guide lines for ecological river management. The taxonomical diversity, or species richness, is used to describe the former and recent state of aquatic biota in these river systems. The ecological diversity, obtained by incorporating the concept of ecological groups into the concept of biodiversity, appears very useful in delineating guide-lines for ecological river management. The present species richness in the main channels still appears to be relatively low, despite major water quality improvements. Although present biodiversity is much improved compared with a few decades ago, it is evident that the present species are mainly eurytopic, including many exotics. The inhibition of a further biodiversity recovery results from river regulation and normalization, which have caused the deterioration and functional isolation of main channel and floodplain biotopes. The importance of connectivity for the diversity of aquatic biota is found to be different for various taxa. Moreover, a transversal zonation by the biota in the floodplain lakes is found, emphazising the importance of differences in the degree of connectivity for a diverse aquatic flora and fauna. It is concluded that floodplain lakes contribute significantly to the total biodiversity of the entire riverine ecosystem. The redevelopment of active secondary channels is required to restore the most typical riverine habitats and biota.     

Interim Responses of Benthic and Snag‐Dwelling Macroinvertebrates to Reestablished Flow and Habitat Structure in the Kissimmee River,Florida, U.S.A.

A critical component in the effort to restore the Kissimmee River ecosystem is the reestablishment of an aquatic invertebrate community typical of free‐flowing rivers of the southeastern United States. This article evaluates early responses of benthic and snag‐dwelling macroinvertebrates to restoration of flow and habitat structure following Phase I construction (interim period) of the Kissimmee River Restoration Project. Replicate benthic and snag samples were collected from remnant river channels in Pool A (Control site), and Pool C, the site of the first phase of restoration (Impact site). Samples were collected quarterly for 2 years prior to construction (baseline) and monthly or quarterly for 3 years following Phase I construction and restoration of flow. Baseline benthic data indicate a community dominated by taxa tolerant of organic pollution and low levels of dissolved oxygen, including the dipterans Chaoborus americanus (Chaoboridae) and the Chironomus/Goeldichironomus group (Chironomidae). Baseline snag data indicate a community dominated by gathering‐collectors, shredders, and scrapers. Passive filtering‐collector invertebrates were rare. Following restoration of flow, benthic invertebrate communities are numerically dominated by lotic taxa, including bivalves and sand‐dwelling chironomids (e.g. Polypedilum spp., Cryptochironomus spp., and Tanytarsini). Snags within the Phase I area support an invertebrate community dominated by passive filtering‐collectors including Rheotanytarsus spp. (Chironomidae) and Cheumatopsyche spp. (Hydropsychidae). Results indicate that restoration of flow has resulted in ecologically significant changes to the river habitat template not observed in Pool A. Observed shifts in benthic and snag macroinvertebrate community structure support previously developed hypotheses for macroinvertebrate responses to hydrologic restoration.     

The boundaries of river systems: the metazoan perspective

1. This overview of metazoans associated with the riparian/groundwater interface focuses on the fauna inhabiting substratum interstices within the stream bed and in alluvial aquifers beneath the floodplain. The objective is to integrate knowledge of habitat conditions and ecology of the interstitial fauna into a broad spatiotemporal perspective of lotic ecosystems. 2. Most aquatic metazoans of terrestrial ancestry, secondarily aquatic forms including insects and water mites (Hydracarina), are largely confined to surface waters (epigean), most of the time penetrating only the superficial interstices of the stream bed. 3. Primary aquatic metazoans include crustaceans and other groups whose entire evolutionary histories took place in water. Some species are epigean, whereas other members of the primary aquatic fauna are true subterranean forms (hypogean ) , residing deep within the stream bed and in alluvial aquifers some distance laterally from the channel. 4. The hypogean/epigean affinities of interstitial animals are reflected in repetitive gradients of species distribution patterns along vertical (depth within the stream bed), longitudinal (riffle/pool), and lateral (across the floodplain) spatial dimensions, as well as along recovery trajectories following floods (temporal dimension). 5. Fluvial dynamics and sediment characteristics interact to determine hydraulic conductivity, oxygen levels, pore space, particle size heterogeneity, organic content and other habitat conditions within the interstitial milieu. 6. Multidimensional environmental gradients occur at various scales across riparian/groundwater boundary zones. The spatiotemporal variability of hydrogeomorphological processes plays an important role in determining habitat heterogeneity, habitat stability, and connectivity between habitat patches, thereby structuring biodiversity patterns across the riverine landscape. 7. The erosive action of flooding maintains a diversity of hydrarch and riparian successional stages in alluvial floodplains. The patchy distribution patterns of interstitial communities at the floodplain scale reflect, in part, the spatial heterogeneity engendered by successional processes. 8. Interstitial metazoans engage in passive and active movements between surface waters and ground waters, between aquatic and riparian habitats, and between different habitat types within the lotic system. Some of these are extensive migrations that involve significant exchange of organic matter and energy between ecosystem compartments. 9. The generally high resilience of lotic ecosystems to disturbance is attributable, in part, to high spatiotemporal heterogeneity. Habitat patches less affected by a particular perturbation may serve as ’refugia ‘; from which survivors recolonize more severely affected areas. Mechanisms of refugium use may also occur within habitats, as, for example, through ontogenetic shifts in microhabitat use. Rigorous investigations of interstitial habitats as refugia should lead to a clearer understanding of the roles of disturbance and stochasticity in lotic ecosystems. 10. Development of realistic ’whole river ‘; food webs have been constrained by the exclusion of interstitial metazoans, which may in fact contribute the majority of energy flow in lotic ecosystems. A related problem is failure to include groundwater/riparian habitats as integral components of alluvial rivers. A conceptual model is presented that integrates groundwater and riparian systems into riverine food webs and that reflects the spatiotemporal complexity of the physical system and connectivity between different components. 11. Interstitial metazoans also serve as ’ecosystem engineers, ‘; by influencing the availability of resouces to other species and by modifying habitat conditions within the sediment. For example, by grazing on biofilm, interstitial animals may markedly stimulate bacterial growth rates and nutrient dynamics. 12. Although there has been a recent surge of interest in the role of interstitial animals in running waters, the knowledge gaps are vast. For example, basic environmental requirements of the majority of groundwater metazoans remain uninvestigated. Virtually nothing is known regarding the role of biotic interactions in structuring faunal distribution patterns across groundwater/riparian boundary zones. Interstitial metazoans may contribute significantly to the total productivity and energy flow of the biosphere, but such data are not available. Nor are sufficient data available to determine the contribution of groundwater animals to estimates of global biodiversity. 13. Effective ecosystem management must include groundwater/riparian ecotones and interstitial metazoans in monitoring and restoration efforts. Evidence suggests that a ’connected ‘; groundwater/riparian system provides natural pollution control, prevents clogging of sediment interstices and maintains high levels of habitat heterogeneity and successional stage diversity. River protection and restoration should maintain or re-establish at least a portion of the natural fluvial dynamics that sustains the ecological integrity of the entire riverine–floodplain–aquifer ecosystem. Keywords: groundwater/riparian ecotones, hyporheic habitat, epigean, hypogean, interstitial fauna, biodiversity, food webs     

Re-establishing and assessing ecological integrity in riverine landscapes

1. River–floodplain systems are among the most diverse and complex ecosystems. The lack of detailed information about functional relationships and processes at the landscape and catchment scale currently hampers assessment of their ecological status.
2. Intensive use and alteration of riverine landscapes by humans have led to severe degradation of river–floodplain systems, especially in highly industrialised countries. Recent water-related regulations and legislation focussing on high standards of ecological integrity back efforts to restore or rehabilitate these systems.
3. Most restoration projects in the past have suffered from a range of deficits, which pertain to project design, the planning process, the integration of associated disciplines, scaling issues and monitoring.
4. The so-called `Leitbild' (i.e. a target vision) assumes a key role in river restoration and the assessment of ecological integrity in general. The development of such a Leitbild requires a multistep approach. Including explicitly the first step that defines the natural, type-specific reference condition (i.e. a visionary as opposed to an operational Leitbild), has great practical advantages for restoration efforts, primarily because it provides an objective benchmark, as is required by the European Water Framework Directive and other legal documents.
5. Clearly defined assessment criteria are crucial for evaluating ecological integrity, especially in the pre- and postrestoration monitoring phases. Criteria that reflect processes and functions should play a primary role in future assessments, so as to preserve and restore functional integrity as a fundamental component of ecological integrity.
6. Case studies on the Kissimmee River (U.S.A.), the Rhine River (Netherlands and Germany), and the Drau River (Austria) are used to illustrate the fundamental principles underlying successful restoration projects of river–floodplain systems.     

Invertebrate seedbanks: rehydration of soil from an unregulated river floodplain in the south-eastern U.S.

1. We investigated the responsiveness of aquatic invertebrates to rehydration of floodplain soil in a south‐eastern U.S. river floodplain. Non‐inundated soil divots containing invertebrate seedbanks were collected from three floodplain elevations with different inundation histories (inundated for 2, 38, and 78% of a year), and subjected to rehydration (experimental inundation) in aquaria for 10 weeks. 2. Before rehydration, samples were collected to assess the initial density and composition of invertebrates in non‐inundated soil at each elevation. After rehydration, benthic samples were collected biweekly and emergence of aquatic insects was collected weekly from aquaria. 3. The surviving invertebrates were classified as aquatic, semi‐aquatic and terrestrial. Some aquatic invertebrates survived the non‐inundated period in an active state (e.g. Chironomidae and Ceratopogonidae), while others appeared to be dormant (e.g. Heptageniidae, microcrustaceans and Chironomidae). The response for several invertebrates (e.g. Chironominae, Oligochaeta, Collembola and terrestrial invertebrates) depended on the length of rehydration and inundation history. 4. The capacity of aquatic invertebrates to survive and recover was greatest at the most frequently inundated site. Despite variation in floodplain environments, both active and dormant invertebrates persisting in non‐inundated floodplain soil contributed to the floodplain assemblage during flooding. Thus, maintaining the connection between river and floodplain appears to be important in sustaining the invertebrate seedbank and its capacity to recover during inundation. River channelisation and regulation that severs this connection may result in a loss of diversity and abundance.     

The influence of floodplain habitat on the quantity and quality of riverine phytoplankton carbon produced during the flood season in San Francisco Estuary

Primary productivity, community respiration, chlorophyll a concentration, phytoplankton species composition, and environmental factors were compared in the Yolo Bypass floodplain and adjacent Sacramento River in order to determine if passage of Sacramento River through floodplain habitat enhanced the quantity and quality of phytoplankton carbon available to the aquatic food web and how primary productivity and phytoplankton species composition in these habitats were affected by environmental conditions during the flood season. Greater net primary productivity of Sacramento River water in the floodplain than the main river channel was associated with more frequent autotrophy and a higher P:R ratio, chlorophyll a concentration, and phytoplankton growth efficiency (α^B). Total irradiance and water temperature in the euphotic zone were positively correlated with net primary productivity in winter and early spring but negatively correlated with net primary productivity in the late spring and early summer in the floodplain. In contrast, net primary productivity was correlated with chlorophyll a concentration and streamflow in the Sacramento River. The flood pulse cycle was important for floodplain production because it facilitated the accumulation of chlorophyll a and wide diameter diatom and green algal cells during the drain phase. High chlorophyll a concentration and diatom and green algal biomass enabled the floodplain to export 14–37% of the combined floodplain plus river load of total, diatom and green algal biomass and wide diameter cells to the estuary downstream, even though it had only 3% of the river streamflow. The study suggested the quantity and quality of riverine phytoplankton biomass available to the aquatic food web could be enhanced by passing river water through a floodplain during the flood season.     

The influence of dams on ecohydrological conditions in the Huaihe River basin, China

Maintaining natural hydrologic variability is essential in conserving native riverine biota and river ecosystem integrity. Hydrologic regimes play a major role in structuring the biotic diversity within river ecosystems, as they control key habitat conditions within the river channel, the floodplain, etc. Alterations in streamflow regimes may modify many of these habitat attributes and impair ecosystem connectivity. There are many dams constructed in the Huaihe River basin that are drastically altering the natural hydrologic regimes of the river. We selected the Bengbu Sluice as a control node to study the influence of the Bengbu Sluice and all its upstream dams on the hydrologic regime. Using Indicators of Hydrologic Alteration and Range of Variability Approach methods, we assessed hydrologic alteration at the streamgauge site to demonstrate the influence of dams on ecohydrological conditions in the Huaihe River basin. The results show that dams have a strong influence on ecohydrological conditions, especially in dry seasons. The river ecohydrological targets and the minimum ecological and environmental flow requirements for the Bengbu section defined by this study can support ecosystem management and restoration plans and provide ecological operations for the Bengbu Sluice.     

Hydromorphological restoration of running waters: effects on benthic invertebrate assemblages

1. River restoration has received considerable attention, with much recent focus on restoring river hydromorphology to improve impoverished aquatic communities. However, we still lack a clear understanding of the response of aquatic biota to river restoration. 2. We studied the effects of hydromorphological restoration on benthic invertebrate assemblages in 25 river sites in Germany using standardised methods. Restoration efforts were primarily aimed to restore habitat heterogeneity; correspondingly, habitat diversity increased at most sites. 3. Similarity of benthic invertebrate assemblages between restored and unrestored river sections was low (mean similarity was 0.32 for Jaccard and 0.46 for Sørensen). Community‐based metrics, such as the percentage of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera taxa, also differed between restored and unrestored sections. 4. Only three of the 25 restored sections were classified as having ‘good ecological quality’ class according to the European Water Framework Directive criteria; hence, poor water quality is probably one factor impeding recolonisation. 5. Our results show that isolated restoration measures do not necessarily result in positive effects on aquatic biota and that better understanding of the interconnectedness within a catchment is required before we can adequately predict biotic responses to structural river restoration.     

The fauna of dynamic riverine landscapes

1.  Riverine landscapes are heterogeneous in space (complex mosaic of habitat types) and time (expansion and contraction cycles, landscape legacies). They are inhabited by a diverse and abundant fauna of aquatic, terrestrial and amphibious species.
2.  Faunal distribution patterns are determined by interactive processes that reflect the landscape mosaic and complex environmental gradients. The life cycles of many riverine species rely upon a shifting landscape mosaic and other species have become adapted to exploit the characteristically high turn-over of habitats.
3.  The complex landscape structure provides a diversity of habitats that sustains various successional stages of faunal assemblages. A dynamic riverine landscape sustains biodiversity by providing a variety of refugia and through ecological feedbacks from the organisms themselves (ecosystem engineering).
4.  The migration of many species, aquatic and terrestrial, is tightly coupled with the temporal and spatial dynamics of the shifting landscape mosaic. Alternation of landscape use by terrestrial and aquatic fauna corresponds to the rise and fall of the flood. Complex ecological processes inherent to intact riverine landscapes are reflected in their biodiversity, with important implications for the restoration and management of river corridors.     

Restoration strategies for river floodplains along large lowland rivers in Europe

1. Most temperate rivers are heavily regulated and characterised by incised channels, aggradated floodplains and modified hydroperiods. As a consequence, former extensive aquatic/terrestrial transition zones lack most of their basic ecological functions.
2. Along large rivers in Europe and North America, various floodplain restoration or rehabilitation projects have been planned or realised in recent years. However, restoration ecology is still in its infancy and the literature pertinent to river restoration is rather fragmented. (Semi-) aquatic components of floodplains, including secondary channels, disconnected and temporary waters as well as marshes, have received little attention, despite their significant contribution to biological diversity.
3. Many rehabilitation projects were planned or realised without prior knowledge of their potential for success or failure, although, these projects greatly contributed to our present understanding of river–floodplain systems.
4. River rehabilitation benefits from a consideration of river ecosystem concepts in quantitative terms, comparison with reference conditions, historical or others, and the establishment of interdisciplinary partnerships.
5. We present examples from two large European rivers, the Danube and the Rhine, in which the role of aquatic connectivity has been extensively studied. The Danube delta with its diversity of floodplain lakes across an immense transversal gradient (up to 10 km) serves as a reference system for restoration projects along lowland sections of large rivers such as the Rhine in the Netherlands.     

Potential for biofilms as biological indicators in Australian riverine systems

Summary Biological indicators have been widely used in Australian riverine systems to assess the effectiveness of past and current management. The short generation time, sessile nature, responsiveness to environmental conditions and the availability of sound, quantitative methodologies make biofilms suitable as a monitoring tool in these systems. This paper describes biofilm structure, function and development through the processes of succession and disturbance. Biofilms are assemblages of algae, fungi and microorganisms which cover rocks, wood and sediments in aquatic systems. A review of biofilm collection and processing techniques using relevant Australian and international studies reveals a large literature on many structural and functional biofilm attributes. Studies using structural attributes such as biomass and diversity to examine water quality impacts and invertebrate grazers dominate the Australian literature. More recently, studies have used functional biofilm attributes such as metabolism and foodweb interactions. Monitoring programs that combine structural and functional biofilm attributes will allow the best assessment of impacts in riverine systems. Biofilm functional parameters provide an integrated, long-term measure of ecosystem function, with structural attributes such as biomass and diversity allowing historical comparisons with previously recorded datasets. Monitoring programs such as these with a well-founded scientific base and defined management outcomes will expand our knowledge of river function and contribute to the restoration of Australian river systems.     

Interim Response of Dissolved Oxygen to Reestablished Flow in the Kissimmee River,Florida, U.S.A.

Restoration of the Kissimmee River should have multiple ecological benefits including improved dissolved oxygen (DO) within the river channel. Channelization of the Kissimmee River virtually eliminated flow through the natural river channel. After channelization, chronically low DO concentrations were observed in the stagnant remnant channel. Although no DO data from before channelization exist, reference estimates of pre‐channelization conditions were derived from seven relatively unimpacted streams. Stations along the Kissimmee River were sampled for 3 years before construction of the first phase of the restoration project began and for up to 8 years after the completion of construction. After Phase I construction, DO concentrations in the area of the river channel to which flow had been restored increased significantly from 2.2 to 4.9 mg/L, which is similar to DO concentrations observed in the reference streams. Mean DO concentrations for the reference streams ranged from 4.6 to 6.7 mg/L. Comparison of reference data to data from the pre‐Phase I and post‐Phase I system suggests that channelization had a negative impact on DO and that DO concentrations in the post‐Phase I Kissimmee River channel have made a significant recovery. Long‐term data trends demonstrate that DO concentrations can be negatively impacted by high flow events and that recovery from these events is generally quick, suggesting some degree of resilience in the system.     

Do invertebrate communities in floodplains change predictably along a river's length?

1. Invertebrate assemblages were described for nine floodplain sites located on a longitudinal gradient of river discharge in the Altamaha River catchment. The Altamaha River and its tributaries constitute one of the few remaining ‘unregulated’ catchments in the southeastern U.S. We predicted that, as the character of lateral flood pulses into backwater swamps changed along the discharge gradient, so would the structure of invertebrate communities. We also examined the relationship between invertebrate assemblages and physicochemical factors (degree of floodplain inundation, pH, conductivity and nutrient concentrations). 2. Cluster analyses of both invertebrate abundance and biomass separated the nine sites into three groups corresponding to their positions in the catchment (upper, mid‐ and lower reach clusters). Non‐metric multidimensional scaling ordinations further corroborated the groupings (with combined axis scores of 92% and 73% for abundance and biomass, respectively) and showed significant correlations with degree of inundation and conductivity (abundance), and conductivity, nitrate and phosphate concentrations (biomass). 3. Floodplains in the upper reaches were dominated by terrestrial taxa, such as earthworms, oribatid mites, collembolans and assorted terrestrial fly larvae, and some rapidly developing aquatics (harpacticoid crustaceans and mosquitoes). In the mid‐reach, the dominant taxa were longer lived aquatic organisms such as mayflies and aquatic oligochaetes, although some terrestrial organisms (elaterid beetles and mites) were still common. Invertebrate families dependent on water flow, such as riffle beetles and some mayflies, were common only in mid‐reach floodplain sites. Lower reaches were dominated by lentic aquatic taxa such as dytiscid beetles and asellid isopods, which commonly persist in wetlands after they dry. 4. Our study indicates that invertebrate community structure varies predictably among floodplains in the Altamaha catchment, with headwater habitats being dominated by terrestrial and rapidly‐developing aquatic invertebrates, mid‐reaches characterised by an influx of invertebrates from the river and lower reaches being dominated by wetland taxa with desiccation‐resistant stages. This spatial variability should be considered when applying the Flood Pulse Concept.