Wetland ecosystem monitoring: multi-metric indicesenvironmentalmonitoring.alberta.ca/.../2017/12/...Ecosystem-Monitor… · Assessment of Indices of Biotic Integrity and Performance

Wetland ecosystem monitoring: multi-metric indicesDr. Rebecca Rooney [email protected]

25 Oct 2017 Department of Biology

Dr. Rebecca Rooney [email protected]

1. Background on reference condition approach and MMIsReference condition approachEcological Integrity

2. Application to OSM reclaimed marshes3. Extension to Beaverhills Sub-watershed4. Expansion to Parkland & Grassland AB5. Plans

Existing dataNew data

Overview


Background Continuum

Reference Degraded Continuum

Degraded ConditionLeast Disturbed/

Reference

High confidence High confidence

Range of Natural Variability?

Range of Natural Variability?Range of Natural Variability?Range of Natural Variability?

Healthy, Diverse, Functional?Unhealthy, Poor, Dysfunctional?

Why we need wetland evaluation tools


What is an MMI?

Multi-metric index is a tool Characterize the range of natural variability Characterize the degraded condition Use metrics to situate “test sites” on that gradient

Multi-metric

IBIsBEASTRIVPACS

Under bioassessment theory

ANOSIM

RCAs

Multivariate

MMIs

Estimate ecological integrity


1978 – Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological

integrity of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem”

1992 – UN Conference on Env. and Development, Rio de Janeiro “ecosystem integrity is a goal for all countries when considering

development”

1998 – Canada National Parks Act legally defines ecological integrity “A condition that is determined to be characteristic of its natural

region and likely to persist, including abiotic components and the composition and abundance of native species and biological communities, rates of change and supporting processes.”

2004 – Convention on Biological Diversity COP 7 Decision VII/28

Ecological integrity

Equivalent land capability• Similar in structure and

function to a naturally occurring analogue

• Self-sustaining: capable of adapting to change and recovering from stress

• Integrated with the surrounding landscape


MMIs to measure Ecological Integrity

Habitat type

Assemblage(s) Select Citations

Forests Arthropods, Ants,Birds, Moss, Lianas, Vegetation

O’Connell et al. 2000; Major and Beeston 2002; Glennon et al. 2005; Cardoso et al. 2007; Frego et al. 2007; Merganic et al. 2012;

Shrub Arthropods; Birds, Frogs, Vegetation

Karr and Kimberling 2003; Diffendorfer et al. 2007

Rivers & streams

Benthic Invertebrates, Diatoms, Fish

Karr 1981; Steedman et al. 1988; Lyons et al. 1995; Hill et al. 2000; Oberdorff et al. 2002; Griffith et al. 2005; Wang et al. 2005; Pont et al. 2006

Riparian Birds Bryce et al. 2002; Canterbury et al. 2000;

Estuary Benthic Invertebrates, Fish

Weisberg et al. 1997; Deegan et al. 1997; Van Dolan et al. 1999;

Wetlands Birds, Fish, Invertebrates, Vegetation

Dekeyser et al. 2003; Raab and Bayley 2012; Rooney and Bayley 2012; Wilson and Bayley 2012; Wilcox et al. 2002; Howe et al. 2007

Lakes Benthic Invertebrates, Fish, Phytoplankton

Minns et al. 1994; Blocksom et al. 2002; Kane et al. 2009; Lyons et al. 2000


MMI development and validation steps


Assessment of Indices of Biotic Integrity and Performance Indicators of Wetland Health for Oil Sands and Natural Reference Wetlands

2007 – 2011, P.I. Dr. Suzanne Bayley Objective: develop and test an approach to evaluate ecological

integrity across a range of constructed, disturbed, and natural shallow open water marshes

Characterize environmental stress gradient Select suitable biological metrics Develop an IBI Test the IBI on an independent set of sites

Application in OSM reclamation

OS Process Affected OS Reference Reference

63 wetlands• 38 REF• 12 OSREF• 13 OSPADr. Rebecca Rooney [email protected]

Abiotic MMI“Stress gradient”

Water

Sediment

Physical

Cont.

Cations

TN

% water

Max depthSecchi/TotalAmplitude

% oil

Cl-

PC 1 Scores

-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8

PC 2

Sco

res

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

TP

Conductivity

TDN

TDS

NH4+

TN

NaCationsAnions

Just need 8

Roon

ey a

nd B

ayle

y(2

010)

Eco

logi

cal I

ndic

ator

s.

52 environmental variablesOrdination to summarize


Biological MMIs

Biotic integrity in reclaimed wetlands?Submersed aquatic vegetation

InvertebratesWet meadow vegetation

Algae pigments

Vege

tatio

n-ba

sed

IBIs


Advantages of vegetation

Advantages of vegetation Relatively easy to sample and ID

Data available immediately

Integrative (temporal & environmental)

Biologically important Habitat/food to inverts, algae, waterfowl

Cultural importance (e.g., Tracy Howlett) Traditional foods and medicines

Indicative of ecosystem functions Nutrient cycling Carbon sequestration

Diagnostic indicators (e.g., Neal Tanna) Halophytes and alkali species Ruderal species Drought tolerators

Cairns (1993) A proposed framework for developing indicators of ecosystem health. Hydrobiologia.Dr. Rebecca Rooney [email protected]

Bayley et al. 2014. URL: http://www.ai-es.ca/media/12948/assessment_methods_for_reclamation_of_permanent_marshes_in_the_oil_sands.pdf

Technology Transfer

Simple to implement and tech transfer investment• Takes 1-2 hrs per site in the field to

measure• Scores can be calculated by hand• Less taxonomic expertise required• Smaller datasets to manage and

QA/QC


Extension to Beaverhills

AWRI project

Naturalized Stormwater pondStormwaterpond

Reference

Agricultural

Restored

Led by Dr. Suzanne Bayley

2008-2011


Using different biological communities

Reference

Agricultural

Restored by DUC

Naturalized SWPClassic SWP

Wils

on, M

. and

Bay

ley,

S.E

. (20

12).

Eco

logi

cal I

ndic

ator

s


Expansion to Parkland and Grassland (White Zone):Increased objectivity

Alberta Innovates Wetland Project: 2013-2017

Lead Rebecca Rooney

Co-PIs Suzanne Bayley, Rich Petrone, Derek Robinson

Develop and validate MMIs for evaluation of natural and restored wetlands in ag landscapes

Vegetation Floristic composition Spatial arrangement

Birds


Concluding thoughts

Benefits of MMIs Rapid, effective, scientifically sound Metrics can emphasize function, structure, Metrics may reflect stressors or responses or both New methods eliminate redundancy in an objective

manner through permutations

Limitations Must be tailored to the disturbance of interest Must be calibrated to wetland type

USEPA National Wetland Condition Assessment has a 4 metric IBI for all wetlands in the conterminous USA!

Region specific


Plans: Seeking a PDF!

Recruiting a PDF – please help us Use existing data Assess ABMI veg to identify “terrestrial”

sites that are peatlands Seek sensitive indicators of human

footprint Collect new data Survey intensive sites (Petrone, Wieder,

etc.) to test a priori hypotheses about drivers and stressors

Sample additional sites to evaluate candidate metrics derived from ABMI data


Acknowledgements

The Rooney Lab thanks:

AEP: Danielle Cobbaert, Matt Wilson, Marsha Trites, Thorsten Hebben, Shane Patterson

HQP: D. Anderson, A. Badger, J. Basso, M. Bolding, R. Bonin, S. Coogan, J. Gleason, G. Howell, N. Meyers, H. Polan, D. Raab

Co-investigators: Dr. Suzanne Bayley, Dr. Jan Ciborowski, Dr. Irena Creed, Dr. Lee Foote, Dr. Naomi Krogman, Dr. Rich Petrone, Dr. Derek Robinson, Dr. Claudia Sheedy

Funders


Documents

Wetland ecosystem monitoring: multi-metric indicesenvironmentalmonitoring.alberta.ca/.../2017/12/...Ecosystem-Monitor… · Assessment of Indices of Biotic Integrity and Performance