Assessing physical surrogates for biodiversity: Do tributary and stream type classifications reflect macroinvertebrate assemblage diversity in running waters?

Abstract

Landscape classifications are increasingly being used in conservation planning and biodiversity management, although there is a dearth of studies actually showing concordant patterns between such classifications and biodiversity. We studied the utility of tributary and stream type classifications in accounting for the variability of invertebrate biodiversity in a boreal drainage system. We found that only weak, although significant, differences existed between the studied three tributaries and four stream types in macroinvertebrate assemblage structure, species distributions, and taxonomic richness. Further, the classification strengths, calculated as mean within-group-similarity minus mean between-group-similarity of assemblage structure, were rather low, suggesting that the a priori physical classifications did not effectively describe variability in macroinvertebrate assemblage structure. The low classification strengths likely resulted from the facts that: (i) most stream macroinvertebrate taxa show individualistic responses to environmental gradients; (ii) many taxa occur either across all stream types; or (iii) only sporadically in a given stream type; and (iv) only a few species show high fidelity to a given stream type. However, the significance of the differences in macroinvertebrate assemblage structure and taxonomic richness, as well as a bunch of effective indicator species for different stream types, suggest that such classifications could be used as a preliminary scheme for the conservation planning of running waters. This reasoning is also supported by the evidence from other studies that have found stream size and the distance to upstream lakes to shape considerably the biodiversity of various groups of stream organisms, although no single organism group is likely to show a perfect match with any classification scheme.