首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American Water Resources Association >RAPID GEOMORPHIC AND HABITAT STREAM ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUES INFORM RESTORATION DIFFERENTLY BASED ON LEVELS OF STREAM DISTURBANCE
【24h】

RAPID GEOMORPHIC AND HABITAT STREAM ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUES INFORM RESTORATION DIFFERENTLY BASED ON LEVELS OF STREAM DISTURBANCE

机译:快速地貌和生境流评估技术可根据流干扰水平不同地通知恢复

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Visual-based rapid assessment techniques provide an efficient method for characterizing the restoration potential of streams, with many focusing on channel stability and instream habitat features. Few studies, however, have compared these techniques to see if they result in differing restoration priorities. Three rapid assessment techniques were contrasted at three wild trout streams in western New York with different amounts of channel disturbance. Two methods focused only on geomorphic stability, whereas the third addressed physical habitat condition. Habitat assessment scores were not correlated with scores for either geomorphic assessment method and they varied more between channels with different degrees of disturbance. A model based on dynamic equilibrium concepts best explains the variation among the streams and techniques because it accounts for a stream's capacity to maintain ecological integrity despite some inherent instability. Geomorphic indices can serve as effective proxies for biological indices in highly disturbed systems. Yet, this may not be the case in less disturbed systems, where geomorphic indices cannot differentiate channel adjustments that impact biota from those that do not. Dynamically stable streams can include both stable and unstable reaches locally as characterized by geomorphic methods and translating these results into restoration priorities may not be appropriate if interpretations are limited to the reach scale.
机译:基于视觉的快速评估技术为表征河流的恢复潜力提供了一种有效的方法,其中许多都集中在河道的稳定性和河流内生境特征上。但是,很少有研究对这些技术进行比较,以了解它们是否导致不同的修复优先级。三种快速评估技术在纽约西部的三个鳟鱼溪流中受到了不同程度的河道扰动的影响。两种方法仅关注地貌稳定性,而第三种方法则针对物理栖息地条件。生境评估得分与两种地貌评估方法的得分均不相关,并且在干扰程度不同的渠道之间差异更大。基于动态平衡概念的模型可以最好地解释溪流和技术之间的差异,因为它考虑了溪流保持生态完整性的能力,尽管存在某些固有的不稳定因素。地貌指标可以作为高度干扰系统中生物学指标的有效代理。但是,在受干扰程度较小的系统中可能不是这种情况,在该系统中,地貌指数无法区分影响生物群的通道调整和不影响生物量的通道调整。如地貌方法所表征,动态稳定的河流可包括局部的稳定和不稳定河段,如果解释仅限于河段规模,则将这些结果转换为恢复优先次序可能是不合适的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号