Identifying priority aquatic refuges to sustain freshwater biodiversity in intermittent streams in eastern Australia

The hydrological variability of intermittent streams means that the spatial distribution of dry‐season aquatic refuges within river networks and the temporal dynamics of hydrological connectivity between them are critical for the persistence of aquatic biodiversity. Here, a new approach is demonstra...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Aquatic conservation 2022-10, Vol.32 (10), p.1584-1595
Main Authors: Yu, Songyan, Rose, Peter M., Bond, Nick R., Bunn, Stuart E., Kennard, Mark J.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aquatic environment
Australia
Biodiversity
Catchment area
Catchments
Conservation
Conservation areas
Creeks & streams
Fish
Fish conservation
Fresh water
Freshwater
graph theory
Headwaters
hydrological connectivity
Hydrology
Identification
Inland water environment
Intermittent streams
Networks
priority refuge
Protected areas
Rare species
Refuges
River catchments
River networks
Rivers
south‐east Queensland
Spatial distribution
Stream discharge
Stream flow
Streams
Surface water
systematic conservation prioritization
Temporal variations
Water bodies
Wildlife conservation
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The hydrological variability of intermittent streams means that the spatial distribution of dry‐season aquatic refuges within river networks and the temporal dynamics of hydrological connectivity between them are critical for the persistence of aquatic biodiversity. Here, a new approach is demonstrated to identify surface water bodies as priority refuges for efficient conservation management of freshwater biodiversity in intermittent stream networks. Recently developed models of surface water extent and daily streamflow were used to represent spatio‐temporal variations in hydrological connectivity and surface water persistence within river networks of eastern Australia over a 107‐yr period. Using this information, systematic conservation planning was applied to prioritize aquatic areas for conservation of 25 fish species under two scenarios. One scenario identified priority refuges to complement those already occurring in protected areas, whereas the other did not consider protected area status. The priority networks identified concentrated on the main stems of river catchments where surface water was more likely to be persistent and aquatic refuges were more likely to be connected, but also included headwaters for rare fish species. All three set conservation targets for the 25 fish species can be met in the best solution of priority networks. Although the second scenario achieved the targets with a smaller size of priority network overall, it required more new aquatic refuges and was thus less efficient than the first scenario. The newly developed datasets are useful for freshwater conservation prioritization because they account for hydrological variability of intermittent streams. The systematic prioritization approach applied is transferable to other regions and freshwater taxa to identify aquatic refuges for biodiversity conservation within intermittent stream systems.
ISSN:1052-7613
1099-0755
DOI:10.1002/aqc.3871