CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 32Freshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyEcology and biodiversity studiesFish Ecology and Management Studies

River Ecosystem Response to Prescribed Vegetation Burning on Blanket peatland

Open access
Brown, Lee E., Johnston, Kerrylyn, Palmer, Sheila M., Aspray, Katie L., Holden, Joseph·2013·PLoS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0081023PMC PMC3836983
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Catchment-scale land-use change is recognised as a major threat to aquatic biodiversity and ecosystem functioning globally. In the UK uplands rotational vegetation burning is practised widely to boost production of recreational game birds, and while some recent studies have suggested burning can alter river water quality there has been minimal attention paid to effects on aquatic biota. We studied ten rivers across the north of England between March 2010 and October 2011, five of which drained burned catchments and five from unburned catchments. There were significant effects of burning, season and their interaction on river macroinvertebrate communities, with rivers draining burned catchments having significantly lower taxonomic richness and Simpson's diversity. ANOSIM revealed a significant effect of burning on macroinvertebrate community composition, with typically reduced Ephemeroptera abundance and diversity and greater abundance of Chironomidae and Nemouridae. Grazer and collector-gatherer feeding groups were also significantly less abundant in rivers draining burned catchments. These biotic changes were associated with lower pH and higher Si, Mn, Fe and Al in burned systems. Vegetation burning on peatland therefore has effects beyond the terrestrial part of the system where the management intervention is being practiced. Similar responses of river macroinvertebrate communities have been observed in peatlands disturbed by forestry activity across northern Europe. Finally we found river ecosystem changes similar to those observed in studies of wild and prescribed forest fires across North America and South Africa, illustrating some potentially generic effects of fire on aquatic ecosystems.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0081023

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Increases in metals were observed following fire across biomes, including boreal peatlands, temperate forests, and Mediterranean forests, and from wildfires as well as prescribed burns.

    “Increases in metals were observed following fire across biomes, including boreal peatlands (Brown et al., 2013), temperate forests (Rust et al., 2018), and Mediterranean forests (Burton et al., 2016; Nunes et al., 2017), and from wildfires as well as prescribed burns (Harper et al., 2018).”

    From Wildfire Induces Changes in Receiving Waters: A Review With Considerations for Water Quality Management (2022) · cites this paper as Brown et al., 2013

    The Abstract and Discussion report higher Al, Mn and Fe in rivers draining burned peatland catchments. But Methods (Study sites) places the study in northern England, not boreal peatlands. The wildfire comparison is attributed to a different citation in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In the majority of studies, invertebrate diversity in streams was reduced following wildfire, especially sensitive taxa, and this was true in boreal, temperate, and Mediterranean biomes.

    “In the majority of studies, invertebrate diversity in streams was reduced following wildfire, especially sensitive taxa (e.g., from the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera orders), and this was true in boreal, temperate, and Mediterranean biomes (Beche et al., 2005; Brown et al., 2013; Earl & Blinn, 2003; Harper et al., 2018; Harris et al., 2015; Minshall et al., 2001; Rinne, 1996; Spencer”

    From Wildfire Induces Changes in Receiving Waters: A Review With Considerations for Water Quality Management (2022) · cites this paper as Brown et al., 2013

    The Results report lower taxonomic richness and Simpson’s diversity in rivers draining burned peatland, and reduced Ephemeroptera abundance. But this study examined prescribed vegetation burning in northern England, not wildfire across boreal, temperate, and Mediterranean biomes. The Discussion also notes several wildfire or prescribed-fire studies that found no effect on richness, so this source does not establish a reduction in the majority of wildfire studies. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Two studies of prescribed burns on macroinvertebrates found generally moderate responses of <1 yr duration.

    “Similarly, nutrient increases were less under prescribed burns and also of shorter duration than for wildfire (e.g., Knoepp & Swank, 1993), and two studies of prescribed burns on macroinvertebrates found generally moderate responses of <1 yr duration (Beche et al., 2005; Brown et al., 2013).”

    From Wildfire Induces Changes in Receiving Waters: A Review With Considerations for Water Quality Management (2022) · cites this paper as Brown et al., 2013

    The Results report significant differences in macroinvertebrate richness, diversity, and community composition between burned and unburned rivers, supporting the claim that prescribed burning was associated with a response. But Methods > Field sampling says rivers were sampled over 20 months, and Methods > Study sites describes burned catchments with patches ranging from less than 1 to 25 years since burning. The paper does not establish that the responses lasted less than one year. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Elevated sulfate concentrations were most often associated with responses in boreal/peatland region lakes, but elevated sulfate has also been observed in temperate streams.

    “Elevated sulfate concentrations were most often associated with responses in boreal/peatland region lakes (Bayley et al., 1992; Brown et al., 2013; Crilly et al., 2017; Lydersen et al., 2014), but elevated sulfate has also been observed in temperate streams (Beche et al., 2005).”

    From Wildfire Induces Changes in Receiving Waters: A Review With Considerations for Water Quality Management (2022) · cites this paper as Brown et al., 2013

    The Methods (Field sampling; page unavailable) say sulphate was measured in peatland rivers, but do not report elevated concentrations. The Results and Conclusion (pages unavailable) associate responses with other water-quality variables, not sulphate; searches for SO4 and elevated sulphate found no passage supporting the claim attributed to Brown et al. The temperate-stream clause is cited to a different source and is not judged here. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 52

  1. [1]Vörösmarty CJ, McIntyre PB, Gessner MO, Dudgeon D, Prusevich A et al. (2010) Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467: 555- 561. doi: 10.1038/nature09440. PubMed: 20882010. 20882010 · DOI · Paper page
  2. [2]Allan JD (2004) Landscapes and riverscapes: The influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution, and Systematics 35: 257- 284. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.35.120202.110122. · DOI · Paper page
  3. [3]Paul MJ, Meyer JL (2001) Streams in the urban landscape. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics and Biodiversity 32: 333- 365. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.32.081501.114040. · DOI · Paper page
  4. [4]Urban MC, Skelly DK, Burchsted D, Price W, Lowry S (2006) Stream communities across a rural–urban landscape gradient. Diversity and Distributions 12: 337- 350. doi: 10.1111/j.1366-9516.2005.00226.x. · DOI
  5. [5]Finn DS, Bonada N, Múrria C, Hughes JM (2011) Small but mighty: headwaters are vital to stream network biodiversity at two levels of organization. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 30: 963- 980. doi: 10.1899/11-012.1. · DOI
  6. [6]Minshall GW (2003) Responses of stream benthic macroinvertebrates to fire. Forest Ecology and Management 178: 155- 161. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(03)00059-8. · DOI
  7. [7]Minshall GW, Robinson CT, Lawrence DE (1997) Postfire responses of lotic ecosystems in Yellowstone National Park, U.S.A. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54: 2509– 2525. doi: 10.1139/f97-160. · DOI · Paper page
  8. [8]Vieira NKM, Clements WH, Guevara LS, Jacobs BF (2004) Resistance and resilience of stream insect communities to repeated hydrologic disturbances after a wildfire. Freshwater Biology 49: 1243- 1259. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2004.01261.x. · DOI
  9. [9]Vieira NKM, Barnes TR, Mitchell KA (2011) Effects of wildfire and postfire floods on stonefly detritivores of the Pajarito Plateau, New Mexico. Western North American Naturalist 71: 257- 270. doi: 10.3398/064.071.0213. · DOI
  10. [10]Freckleton RP (2004) The problems of prediction and scale in applied ecology: the example of fire as a management tool. Journal of Applied Ecology 41: 599- 603. doi: 10.1111/j.0021-8901.2004.00941.x. · DOI
  11. [11]Yibarbuk D, Whitehead PJ, Russel-Smith K, Jackson D, Godjuwa C et al. (2001) Fire ecology and aboriginal land management in central Arnhem Land, Northern Australia: A tradition of ecosystem management. Journal of Biogeography 28: 325- 343.
  12. [12]Verble RM, Yanoviak SP (2013) Short-term effects of prescribed burning on ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) assemblages in Ozark forests. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 106: 198- 203. doi: 10.1603/AN12108. · DOI
  13. [13]Arkle RS, Pilliod DS (2010) Prescribed fires as ecological surrogates for wildfires: A stream and riparian perspective. Forest Ecology and Management 259: 893- 903. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.11.029. · DOI
  14. [15]Britton DL (1991) The benthic macroinvertebrate fauna of a South African mountain stream and its response to fire. South African Journal of Aquatic Science 17: 51- 64. doi: 10.1080/10183469.1991.9631313. · DOI
  15. [16]Ramchunder SJ, Brown LE, Holden J (2013) Rotational vegetation burning effects on peatland stream ecosystems. Journal of Applied Ecology 50: 636- 648. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12082. · DOI
  16. [17]Anderson RC (1989) The historic role of fire in the north american grassland. In: Collins SL Wallace LL Fire in North American Tallgrass Prairies. Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press.
  17. [18]Davis EA (1989) Prescribed fire in Arizona chaparral: effects on stream water quality. Forest Ecology and Management 26: 189- 206. doi: 10.1016/0378-1127(89)90120-5. · DOI
  18. [19]Ramchunder SJ, Brown LE, Holden J (2009) Environmental effects of drainage, drain-blocking and prescribed vegetation burning in UK upland peatlands. Progress in Physical Geography 33: 49 - 79. doi: 10.1177/0309133309105245. · DOI
  19. [21]Yallop AR, Thacker JI, Thomas G, Stephens M, Clutterbuck B et al. (2006) The extent and intensity of management burning in the English uplands. Journal of Applied Ecology 43: 1138- 1148. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01222.x. · DOI
  20. [22]Sutherland WJ, Armstrong-Brown S, Armsworth PR, Brereton T, Brickland J et al. (2006) The identification of 100 ecological questions of high policy relevance in the UK. Journal of Applied Ecology 43: 617 - 627. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01188.x. · DOI
  21. [23]Grant MC, Mallard J, Leigh S, Thompson PS (2012) The costs and benefits of grouse moor management to biodiversity and aspects of the wider environment: a review. Sandy, UK: RSPB. 99 pp.
  22. [24]Glaves D, Morecroft M, Fitzgibbon C, Owen M, Phillips S et al. (2013) The effects of managed burning on upland peatland biodiversity, carbon and water: Natural England Evidence Review NEER004. Peterborough, UK.
  23. [25]Evans M, Warburton J (2007) The Geomorphology of Upland Peat: Pattern, Process, Form. Wiley-Blackwell.
  24. [26]Wood PJ, Armitage PD (1997) Biological effects of fine sediment in the lotic environment. Environ Manage 21: 203 - 217. doi: 10.1007/s002679900019. PubMed: 9008071. 9008071 · DOI
  25. [27]Worrall F, Armstrong A, Adamson JK (2007) The effects of burning and sheep-grazing on water table depth and soil water quality in a upland peat. Journal of Hydrology 339: 1- 14. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.12.025. · DOI
  26. [28]Clay GD, Worrall F, Clark E, Fraser EDG (2009) Hydrological responses to managed burning and grazing in an upland blanket bog. Journal of Hydrology 376: 486- 495. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.07.055. · DOI
  27. [29]Holden J, Wearing C, Palmer S, Jackson B, Johnston K et al. (in press) Fire decreases near-surface hydraulic conductivity and macropore flow in blanket peat. Hydrological Processes. doi: 10.1002/hyp.9875. · DOI
  28. [30]Holden J, Chapman PJ, Palmer SM, Kay P, Grayson R (2012) The impacts of prescribed moorland burning on water colour and dissolved organic carbon: A critical synthesis. J Environ Manage 101: 92- 103. PubMed: 22406849. 22406849
  29. [31]Clay GD, Worrall F, Aebischer NJ (2012) Does prescribed burning on peat soils influence DOC concentrations in soil and runoff waters? Results from a 10 year chronosequence. Journal of Hydrology 448: 139- 148.
  30. [32]Clay GD, Worrall F, Fraser EDG (2010) Compositional changes in soil water and runoff water following managed burning on a UK upland blanket bog. Journal of Hydrology 380: 135- 145. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.10.030. · DOI
  31. [33]Armitage PD, MacHale AM, Crisp DC (1975) A survey of the invertebrates of four streams in The Moor House National Natural Reserve in Northern England. Freshwater Biology 5: 479 - 495. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.1975.tb00150.x. · DOI
  32. [35]Ramchunder SJ, Brown LE, Holden J (2012) Catchment-scale peatland restoration benefits stream ecosystem biodiversity. Journal of Applied Ecology 49: 182- 191. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02075.x. · DOI
  33. [36]Mihuc TB, Minshall GW (1995) Trophic generalists vs trophic specialists - Implications for food-web dynamics in postfire streams. Ecology 76: 2361- 2372. doi: 10.2307/2265813. · DOI
  34. [38]Simpson EH (1949) Measurement of diversity. Nature 163: 688. doi: 10.1038/163688a0. · DOI
  35. [42]Legendre P, Legendre L (1998) Numerical Ecology. Elsevier. 853 pp.
  36. [43]Ormerod SJ, Rundle SD, Lloyd EC, Douglas AA (1993) The influence of riparian management on the habitat structure and macroinvertebrate communities of upland streams draining plantation forests. Journal of Applied Ecology 30: 13- 24. doi: 10.2307/2404266. · DOI
  37. [44]Weatherley NS, Ormerod SJ (1987) The impact of acidification on macroinvertebrate assemblages in welsh streams: Towards an empirical model. Environ Pollut 46: 223- 240. doi: 10.1016/0269-7491(87)90079-0. PubMed: 15092732. 15092732 · DOI
  38. [45]Kremen C (2005) Managing ecosystem services: what do we need to know about their ecology? Ecol Lett 8: 468- 479. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00751.x. PubMed: 21352450. 21352450 · DOI
  39. [46]Ormerod SJ, Edwards RW (1987) The ordination and classification of macroinvertebrate assemblages in the catchment of the River Wye in relation to environmental factors. Freshwater Biology 17: 533- 546. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.1987.tb01074.x. · DOI
  40. [47]Sutcliffe DW, Carrick TR (1973) Studies on mountain streams in the english Lake District. I. pH, calcium and the distribution of invertebrates in the River Duddon. Freshwater Biology 3: 437- 462. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.1973.tb00933.x. · DOI
  41. [48]Herrmann J, Andersson K (1986) Aluminium impact on respiration of lotic mayflies at low pH. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution 30: 703- 709. doi: 10.1007/BF00303335. · DOI
  42. [49]Fiance SB (1978) Effects of pH on the biology and distribution of Ephemerella funeralis (Ephemeroptera). Oikos 31: 332- 339. doi: 10.2307/3543659. · DOI
  43. [50]Heal KV (2001) Manganese and land-use in upland catchments in Scotland. Sci Total Environ 265: 169- 179. doi: 10.1016/S0048-9697(00)00657-4. PubMed: 11227264. 11227264 · DOI
  44. [51]Nyberg P, Andersson P, Degerman E, Borg H, Olofsson E (1995) Labile inorganic manganese: an overlooked reason for fish mortality in acidified streams? Water Air, and Soil Pollution 85: 333- 340. doi: 10.1007/BF00476851. · DOI
  45. [52]Minshall GW, Royer TV, Robinson CT (2001) Response of the Cache Creek macroinvertebrates during the first 10 years following disturbance by the 1988 Yellowstone wildfires. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 58: 1077- 1088. doi: 10.1139/f01-056. · DOI
  46. [53]Vuori KM, Joensuu I, Latvala J, Jutila E, Ahvonen A (1998) Forest drainage: a threat to benthic biodiversity of boreal headwater streams? Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 8: 745- 759. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0755(1998110)8:6. · DOI
  47. [54]Tallis JH (1987) Fire and flood at Holme Moss: erosion processes in an upland blanket mire. Journal of Ecology 75: 1099 - 1129. doi: 10.2307/2260317. · DOI
  48. [55]Tucker G (2003) Review of the impacts of heather and grassland burning in the uplands on soils, hydrology and biodiversity. English Nature, Peterborough, UK. 148 pp.
  49. [56]Ledger M, Hildrew AG (1998) Temporal and spatial variation in the epilithic biofilm of an acid stream. Freshwater Biology 40: 655- 670. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2427.1998.00364.x. · DOI
  50. [57]Hildrew AG, Townsend CR, Francis J, Finch K (1984) Cellulolytic decomposition in streams of contrasting pH and its relationship with invertebrate community structure. Freshwater Biology 14: 323- 328. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.1984.tb00045.x. · DOI
  51. [58]Ledger ME, Hildrew AG (2000) Herbivory in an acid stream. Freshwater Biology 43: 545- 556. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2427.2000.00534.x. · DOI
  52. [59]Layer K, Riede J, Hildrew AG, Woodward G (2010) Food web structure and stability in 20 streams across a wide pH gradient. Advances in Ecological Research 42: 265- 299. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-381363-3.00005-8. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brown, L. E., Johnston, K., Palmer, S. M., Aspray, K. L., & Holden, J.
Affiliations
University of Leeds (GB)
Corresponding author
Brown, Lee E.
ORCID
Venue
PLoS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2013-11-21
Volume
8
Issue
11
Pages
e81023
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0081023
PMC
PMC3836983
OpenAlex
W2066457082
Cited by
32
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 7
FWCI
2.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Murdoch University Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Natural England
  • Natural Environment Research Council (NE/G00224X/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Freshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Ecology and biodiversity studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish Ecology and Management Studies
Keywords
blanket peatlands, river macroinvertebrates, aquatic biodiversity, land use change, Ephemeroptera, Chironomidae, Nemouridae, trophic guilds, water chemistry
MeSH terms
England, Fires, Seasons, Soil, Ecosystem, Biodiversity, Rivers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review