Evaluating riparian solutions to multiple stressor problems in river ecosystems - A conceptual study.

Rivers are among the most sensitive of all ecosystems to the effects of global change, but options to prevent, mitigate or restore ecosystem damage are still inadequately understood. Riparian buffers are widely advocated as a cost-effective option to manage impacts, but empirical evidence is yet to identify ideal riparian features (e.g. width, length and density) which enhance ecological integrity and protect ecosystem services in the face of catchment-scale stressors. Here, we use an extensive literature review to synthesise evidence on riparian buffer and catchment management effects on instream environmental conditions (e.g. nutrients, fine sediments, organic matter), river organisms and ecosystem functions. We offer a conceptual model of the mechanisms through which catchment or riparian management might impact streams either positively or negatively. The model distinguishes scale-independent benefits (shade, thermal damping, organic matter and large wood inputs) that arise from riparian buffer management at any scale from scale-dependent benefits (nutrient or fine sediment retention) that reflect stressor conditions at broader (sub-catchment to catchment) scales. The latter require concerted management efforts over equally large domains of scale (e.g. riparian buffers combined with nutrient restrictions). The evidence of the relationships between riparian configuration (width, length, zonation, density) and scale-independent benefits is consistent, suggesting a high certainty of the effects. In contrast, scale-dependent effects as well as the biological responses to riparian management are more uncertain, suggesting that ongoing diffuse pollution (nutrients, sediments), but also sources of variability (e.g. hydrology, climate) at broader scales may interfere with the effects of local riparian management. Without concerted management across relevant scales, full biological recovery of damaged lotic ecosystems is unlikely. There is, nevertheless, sufficient evidence that the benefits of riparian buffers outweigh potential adverse effects, in particular if located in the upstream part of the stream network. This supports the use of riparian restoration as a no-regrets management option to improve and sustain lotic ecosystem functioning and biodiversity.

Riparian responses to extreme climate and land-use change scenarios.

Climate change will induce alterations in the hydrological and landscape patterns with effects on riparian ecotones. In this study we assess the combined effect of an extreme climate and land-use change scenario on riparian woody structure and how this will translate into a future risk of riparian functionality loss. The study was conducted in the Tâmega catchment of the Douro basin. Boosted Regression Trees (BRTs) were used to model two riparian landscape indicators related with the degree of connectivity (Mean Width) and complexity (Area Weighted Mean Patch Fractal Dimension). Riparian data were extracted by planimetric analysis of high spatial-resolution Word Imagery Layer (ESRI). Hydrological, climatic and land-use variables were obtained from available datasets and generated with process-based modeling using current climate data (2008-2014), while also considering the high-end RCP8.5 climate-change and "Icarus" socio-economic scenarios for the 2046-2065 time slice. Our results show that hydrological and land-use changes strongly influence future projections of riparian connectivity and complexity, albeit to diverse degrees and with differing effects. A harsh reduction in average flows may impair riparian zones while an increase in extreme rain events may benefit connectivity by promoting hydrologic dynamics with the surrounding floodplains. The expected increase in broad-leaved woodlands and mixed forests may enhance the riparian galleries by reducing the agricultural pressure on the area in the vicinity of the river. According to our results, 63% of river segments in the Tâmega basin exhibited a moderate risk of functionality loss, 16% a high risk, and 21% no risk. Weaknesses and strengths of the method are highlighted and results are discussed based on a resilience perspective with regard to riparian ecosystems.