Emerging threats and persistent conservation challenges for freshwater biodiversity
- Reid, Andrea, Carlson, Andrew, Creed, Irena, Eliason, Erika, Gell, Peter, Johnson, Pieter, Kidd, Karen, MacCormack, Tyson, Olden, Julian, Ormerod, Steve, Smol, John, Taylor, William, Tockner, Klement, Vermaire, Jesse, Dudgeon, David, Cooke, Steven
- Authors: Reid, Andrea , Carlson, Andrew , Creed, Irena , Eliason, Erika , Gell, Peter , Johnson, Pieter , Kidd, Karen , MacCormack, Tyson , Olden, Julian , Ormerod, Steve , Smol, John , Taylor, William , Tockner, Klement , Vermaire, Jesse , Dudgeon, David , Cooke, Steven
- Date: 2019
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Biological Reviews Vol. 94, no. 3 (2019), p. 849-873
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: In the 12 years since Dudgeon et al. (2006) reviewed major pressures on freshwater ecosystems, the biodiversity crisis in the world's lakes, reservoirs, rivers, streams and wetlands has deepened. While lakes, reservoirs and rivers cover only 2.3% of the Earth's surface, these ecosystems host at least 9.5% of the Earth's described animal species. Furthermore, using the World Wide Fund for Nature's Living Planet Index, freshwater population declines (83% between 1970 and 2014) continue to outpace contemporaneous declines in marine or terrestrial systems. The Anthropocene has brought multiple new and varied threats that disproportionately impact freshwater systems. We document 12 emerging threats to freshwater biodiversity that are either entirely new since 2006 or have since intensified: (i) changing climates; (ii) e-commerce and invasions; (iii) infectious diseases; (iv) harmful algal blooms; (v) expanding hydropower; (vi) emerging contaminants; (vii) engineered nanomaterials; (viii) microplastic pollution; (ix) light and noise; (x) freshwater salinisation; (xi) declining calcium; and (xii) cumulative stressors. Effects are evidenced for amphibians, fishes, invertebrates, microbes, plants, turtles and waterbirds, with potential for ecosystem-level changes through bottom-up and top-down processes. In our highly uncertain future, the net effects of these threats raise serious concerns for freshwater ecosystems. However, we also highlight opportunities for conservation gains as a result of novel management tools (e.g. environmental flows, environmental DNA) and specific conservation-oriented actions (e.g. dam removal, habitat protection policies, managed relocation of species) that have been met with varying levels of success. Moving forward, we advocate hybrid approaches that manage fresh waters as crucial ecosystems for human life support as well as essential hotspots of biodiversity and ecological function. Efforts to reverse global trends in freshwater degradation now depend on bridging an immense gap between the aspirations of conservation biologists and the accelerating rate of species endangerment.
Estimating visual quality, a component of culturally-associated ecosystem services in palaeo-lake environments
- Chhetri, Prem, Kattel, Giri, Dong, Xuhui, Yang, Xiangdong, Min, Xu
- Authors: Chhetri, Prem , Kattel, Giri , Dong, Xuhui , Yang, Xiangdong , Min, Xu
- Date: 2014
- Type: Text , Conference paper
- Relation: Symposium on Australia-China Wetland Network Research Partnership; Nanjing Institute of Geography and Limnology Chinese Academy of Sciences (NIGLAS) Nanjing, China; 23rd-28th December 2014 p. 23-26
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Evaluation of visual quality is essentially a multi-dimensional and multi-sensory experience of landscape assessment. Visual quality refers to the character, condition and quality of lakes/wetlands. It involves perceiving, preferring and valuing the visual quality by the public. Visual quality is an outcome of the perceptual, cognitive and emotional processes in response to visual stimuli of a lake environment. Visual quality therefore is dependent upon the perceptual and structural aspects of perceived scenes of wetlands. Visual assessment, an evaluating process of gaining non-material or intangible benefits by people from ecosystems, through spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, self-reflection, recreation, and aesthetic experiences, has now become one of significant research areas under cultural components of ecosystem services. Public perception in such studies is composed from both the objective and subjective elements of human–landscape interactions. However, it is still a matter of debate whether subjective–objective realities are dichotomous or supplementary to enhancing the quality of human experiences in natural settings. In fact, much research considers them as inseparable and integral parts of landscape perception, despite the tendency for disintegrating landscapes into their constituent components. There is a fundamental theoretical divergence of opinions over the question whether a landscape has an intrinsic or ‘objective’ beauty, which may be in some ways measurable or comparable, or whether beauty is a value that can be only attributed subjectively to an area or a specific landscape.
- Authors: Chhetri, Prem , Kattel, Giri , Dong, Xuhui , Yang, Xiangdong , Min, Xu
- Date: 2014
- Type: Text , Conference paper
- Relation: Symposium on Australia-China Wetland Network Research Partnership; Nanjing Institute of Geography and Limnology Chinese Academy of Sciences (NIGLAS) Nanjing, China; 23rd-28th December 2014 p. 23-26
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Evaluation of visual quality is essentially a multi-dimensional and multi-sensory experience of landscape assessment. Visual quality refers to the character, condition and quality of lakes/wetlands. It involves perceiving, preferring and valuing the visual quality by the public. Visual quality is an outcome of the perceptual, cognitive and emotional processes in response to visual stimuli of a lake environment. Visual quality therefore is dependent upon the perceptual and structural aspects of perceived scenes of wetlands. Visual assessment, an evaluating process of gaining non-material or intangible benefits by people from ecosystems, through spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, self-reflection, recreation, and aesthetic experiences, has now become one of significant research areas under cultural components of ecosystem services. Public perception in such studies is composed from both the objective and subjective elements of human–landscape interactions. However, it is still a matter of debate whether subjective–objective realities are dichotomous or supplementary to enhancing the quality of human experiences in natural settings. In fact, much research considers them as inseparable and integral parts of landscape perception, despite the tendency for disintegrating landscapes into their constituent components. There is a fundamental theoretical divergence of opinions over the question whether a landscape has an intrinsic or ‘objective’ beauty, which may be in some ways measurable or comparable, or whether beauty is a value that can be only attributed subjectively to an area or a specific landscape.
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »