Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Causes of macrophyte mass development and management recommendations.
Schneider, Susanne C; Coetzee, Julie A; Galvanese, Elena Fukasawa; Harpenslager, Sarah Faye; Hilt, Sabine; Immerzeel, Bart; Köhler, Jan; Misteli, Benjamin; Motitsoe, Samuel N; Padial, Andre A; Petruzzella, Antonella; Schechner, Anne; Thiébaut, Gabrielle; Thiemer, Kirstine; Vermaat, Jan E.
Affiliation
  • Schneider SC; Norwegian Institute for Water Research, Økernveien 94, 0579 Oslo, Norway; Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, 1432 Ås, Norway.
  • Coetzee JA; Centre for Biological Control (CBC), Department of Botany, Rhodes University, 94, Makhanda (Grahamstown), 6140, South Africa.
  • Galvanese EF; Departamento de Botânica, Universidade Federal do Paraná, 19031, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
  • Harpenslager SF; Dept. of Community and Ecosystem Ecology, Leibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Müggelseedamm 301, 12587 Berlin, Germany; B-Ware Research Centre, 6558, 6503 GB Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  • Hilt S; Dept. of Community and Ecosystem Ecology, Leibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Müggelseedamm 301, 12587 Berlin, Germany.
  • Immerzeel B; Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, 1432 Ås, Norway; Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Sognsveien 68, 0855 Oslo, Norway.
  • Köhler J; Dept. of Community and Ecosystem Ecology, Leibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Müggelseedamm 301, 12587 Berlin, Germany.
  • Misteli B; Université de Rennes, 263 Avenue du Général Leclerc, Campus Beaulieu, UMR 6553 CNRS ECOBIO, 35042 Rennes, France; WasserCluster Lunz, Dr. Carl Kupelwieser Promenade 5, A-3293 Lunz am See, Austria.
  • Motitsoe SN; Centre for Biological Control (CBC), Department of Zoology and Entomology, Rhodes University, 94, Makhanda (Grahamstown) 6140, South Africa; School of Animal, Plant and Environmental Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Private Bag 3, Johannesburg, South Africa.
  • Padial AA; Departamento de Botânica, Universidade Federal do Paraná, 19031, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
  • Petruzzella A; Centre for Biological Control (CBC), Department of Zoology and Entomology, Rhodes University, 94, Makhanda (Grahamstown) 6140, South Africa.
  • Schechner A; Dept. of Community and Ecosystem Ecology, Leibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Müggelseedamm 301, 12587 Berlin, Germany; Robofarm GmbH, Rigaerstr. 63, Berlin, Germany.
  • Thiébaut G; Université de Rennes, 263 Avenue du Général Leclerc, Campus Beaulieu, UMR 6553 CNRS ECOBIO, 35042 Rennes, France.
  • Thiemer K; Norwegian Institute for Water Research, Økernveien 94, 0579 Oslo, Norway; Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, 1432 Ås, Norway.
  • Vermaat JE; Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, 1432 Ås, Norway.
Sci Total Environ ; 931: 172960, 2024 Jun 25.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38710393
ABSTRACT
Aquatic plants (macrophytes) are important for ecosystem structure and function. Macrophyte mass developments are, however, often perceived as a nuisance and are commonly managed by mechanical removal. This is costly and often ineffective due to macrophyte regrowth. There is insufficient understanding about what causes macrophyte mass development, what people who use water bodies consider to be a nuisance, or the potential negative effects of macrophyte removal on the structure and function of ecosystems. To address these gaps, we performed a standardized set of in situ experiments and questionnaires at six sites (lakes, reservoirs, and rivers) on three continents where macrophyte mass developments occur. We then derived monetary values of ecosystem services for different scenarios of macrophyte management ("do nothing", "current practice", "maximum removal"), and developed a decision support system for the management of water courses experiencing macrophyte mass developments. We found that (a) macrophyte mass developments often occur in ecosystems which (unintentionally) became perfect habitats for aquatic plants, that (b) reduced ecosystem disturbance can cause macrophyte mass developments even if nutrient concentrations are low, that (c) macrophyte mass developments are indeed perceived negatively, but visitors tend to regard them as less of a nuisance than residents do, that (d) macrophyte removal lowers the water level of streams and adjacent groundwater, but this may have positive or negative overall societal effects, and that (e) the effects of macrophyte removal on water quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and biodiversity vary, and likely depend on ecosystem characteristics and macrophyte life form. Overall, we found that aquatic plant management often does not greatly affect the overall societal value of the ecosystem, and we suggest that the "do nothing" option should not be easily discarded in the management of perceived nuisance mass developments of aquatic plants.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Ecosystem / Conservation of Natural Resources Language: En Journal: Sci Total Environ Year: 2024 Type: Article Affiliation country: Norway

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Ecosystem / Conservation of Natural Resources Language: En Journal: Sci Total Environ Year: 2024 Type: Article Affiliation country: Norway