RESUMO
Fatty acids are essential to macroinvertebrate growth and reproduction and can indicate food web structure and nutritional quality of basal resources. However, broad-scale examinations of how catchment land cover and associated stressors affect the proportions of fatty acids (FAs) in stream food webs are few.Here, we: (1) examine relationships among proportions of FAs among benthic periphyton and macroinvertebrate collector/gatherers, shredders, and predators; and (2) test if relationships between periphytic and macroinvertebrate FAs were altered due to the intensity of urban development in catchments.Proportions of the ≥20-C eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA 20:5ω3), arachidonic acid (ARA 20:4ω6), and docosahexaenoic acid (22:6ω3) indicated collector/gatherers had a diet richer in periphyton than in shredders, which had significantly lower proportions of these FAs. Collector/gatherers were in turn likely to be high-quality sources of ω3 and ≥ 20-C FAs for predators, which also had significantly greater EPA and ARA proportions than those in shredders. Linoleic (18:2ω6) and α-linolenic acid (18:3ω3) comprised the greatest proportions of FAs in shredders, which suggested a diet dominated by leaf litter and associated hyphomycetes.As catchment urbanisation increased, proportions of total ω3 FAs and EPA in periphyton were significantly greater. This pattern also was seen through macroinvertebrate consumers and predators, given that proportions of these FAs in macroinvertebrates also were significantly correlated with factors associated with catchment urbanisation. The significant increase in total ω3 FAs and EPA proportions within shredders indicated that periphyton growth, and their FAs, increased on leaf litter, probably due to greater nutrient concentrations associated with catchment urbanisation. Proportions of total ω6 FAs in biota were not significantly correlated with factors associated with urban development, which could indicate that they were of sufficient abundance for consumers regardless of urban intensity or possible changes in their sources.Our study provides an informative first step that identified notable differences in proportions of FAs among macroinvertebrates in urban streams and an increase in proportions of total ω3 FAs and EPA in periphyton, consumers, and predators as catchment urbanisation increases. Identifying how FA relationships within food webs change in response to catchment alterations and stressors could inform land use and management decisions by linking environmental changes to measures important to ecosystem outcomes.
RESUMO
Watershed management and policies affecting downstream ecosystems benefit from identifying relationships between land cover and water quality. However, different data sources can create dissimilarities in land cover estimates and models that characterize ecosystem responses. We used a spatially balanced stream study (1) to effectively sample development and urban stressor gradients while representing the extent of a large coastal watershed (>4400 km(2)), (2) to document differences between estimates of watershed land cover using 30-m resolution national land cover database (NLCD) and <1-m resolution land cover data, and (3) to determine if predictive models and relationships between water quality and land cover differed when using these two land cover datasets. Increased concentrations of nutrients, anions, and cations had similarly significant correlations with increased watershed percent impervious cover (IC), regardless of data resolution. The NLCD underestimated percent forest for 71/76 sites by a mean of 11 % and overestimated percent wetlands for 71/76 sites by a mean of 8 %. The NLCD almost always underestimated IC at low development intensities and overestimated IC at high development intensities. As a result of underestimated IC, regression models using NLCD data predicted mean background concentrations of NO3 (-) and Cl(-) that were 475 and 177 %, respectively, of those predicted when using finer resolution land cover data. Our sampling design could help states and other agencies seeking to create monitoring programs and indicators responsive to anthropogenic impacts. Differences between land cover datasets could affect resource protection due to misguided management targets, watershed development and conservation practices, or water quality criteria.