Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-12T22:12:26.352Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relationships between land use and multi-dimensional characteristics of streams and rivers at two different scales

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 July 2011

Se-Rin Park ,
Hyun-Joo Lee ,
Sang-Woo Lee ,
Soon-Jin Hwang ,
Myeong-Seop Byeon ,
Gea-Jae Joo ,
Kwang-Seuk Jeong ,
Dong-Soo Kong  and
Myoung-Chul Kim
Se-Rin Park
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Science, Konkuk University, Seoul 143-701, Republic of Korea
Hyun-Joo Lee
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Science, Konkuk University, Seoul 143-701, Republic of Korea
Sang-Woo Lee*
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Science, Konkuk University, Seoul 143-701, Republic of Korea
Soon-Jin Hwang
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Science, Konkuk University, Seoul 143-701, Republic of Korea
Myeong-Seop Byeon
Affiliation:
Department of Water Management, The Environmental Research Institute, Inchon 404-708, Republic of Korea
Gea-Jae Joo
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Pusan National University, Pusan 609-735, Republic of Korea
Kwang-Seuk Jeong
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Pusan National University, Pusan 609-735, Republic of Korea
Dong-Soo Kong
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Kyonggi University, Suwon 443-760, Republic of Korea
Myoung-Chul Kim
Affiliation:
SOKN Institute of Ecology & Conservation, Seoul 110-034, Republic of Korea
*
*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Despite numerous previous studies, relationships between watershed land use and adjacent streams and rivers at various scales in Korea remain unclear. This study investigated the relationships between land uses and the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of 720 sites of streams and rivers across the country. The land uses at two spatial scales, including a 1-km buffer and the base watershed management region (BWMR), were computed in a geographical information system (GIS) with a digital land use/land cover map. Characteristics of land uses at two spatial scales were then correlated with the monitored multidimensional characteristics of the streams and rivers. The results of this study indicate that land use types have significant effects on stream and river characteristics. Specifically, most characteristics were negatively correlated with the proportions of urban, rice paddy, agricultural, and bare soil areas and positively correlated with the amount of forest. The site-scale and BWMR-scale analyses suggest that BWMR land use patterns were more strongly related to ecological integrity than they were to site land use patterns. Improving our understanding of land use effects will largely depend on relating the results of site-specific studies that use similar response techniques and measures to evaluate ecological integrity. In addition, our results clearly indicate that the characteristics of streams and rivers are closely linked and that land use types differentially affect those characteristics. Thus, effective restoration and management for ecological integrity of lotic system should consider the physical, chemical, and biological factors in combination.

Keywords

Land uselotic ecosystemmulti-dimensional characteristicsecological integrityrestoration
Type
Research Article
Information
Annales de Limnologie - International Journal of Limnology , Volume 47 , Issue S1: River ecosystem health assessment: the value in the management and restoration , 2011 , pp. S107 - S116
Copyright
© EDP Sciences, 2011

References

Allan, J.D., 2004. Landscapes and riverscapes: the influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., 35, 257–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anbumozhi, V., Radhakrishnan, J. and Yamaji, E., 2005. Impact of riparian buffer zones on water quality and associated management considerations. Ecol. Eng., 24, 517–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arienzo, M., Adamo, P., Bianco, M.R. and Violante, P., 2001. Impact of land use and urban runoff on the contamination of the Sarno River basin in Southwestern Italy. Water Air Soil Pollut., 131, 349–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, A., 2003. Land use and water quality. Hydrol. Process., 17, 2499–2501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ban, S. and Oh, C.H., 2010. A development of landscape ecological model for priority setting gereen space on riparian zone. Proc. Korean Environ. Ecol. Conf., 20, 113–117 (in Korean).Google Scholar
Beyene, A., Addis, T., Kifle, D., Legesse, W., Kloos, H. and Triest, L., 2009. Comparative study of benthic diatom and macroinvertebrates as indicators of severe water pollution: case study of the Kebena and Akaki Rivers in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Ecol. Ind., 9, 381–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolstad, P.V. and Swank, W.T., 1997. Cumulative impacts of land use on water quality in a southern Appalachian watershed. J. Am. Water Res. Assoc., 33, 519–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burt, T.P., Matchett, L.S., Goulding, K.W.T., Webster, C.P. and Haycock, N.E., 1999. Denitrification in riparian buffer zones: the role of floodplain hydrology. Hydrol. Process., 13, 1451–1463.3.0.CO;2-W>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, A.B., 1993. Coupling wetland treatment to land treatment: an innovative method for nitrogen stripping. Water Sci. Tech., 29, 141–149.Google Scholar
Davies, P.E. and Nelson, M., 1994. Relationship between riparian buffer widths and the effects of logging on stream habitat, invertebrate community composition, and fish abundance. Aust. J. Marine Freshwater Res., 45, 1289–1305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frissell, C.A., Liss, W.J., Warren, C.E. and Hurley, M.D., 1986. A hierarchical framework for stream habitat classification: viewing streams in a watershed context. Environ. Manage., 10, 199–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardi, C., 2001. Land use, agronomic management and water quality in a small Northern Italian watershed. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 87, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gburek, W.J. and Folmar, G.J., 1999. Flow and chemical contributions to stream flow in an upland watershed: a baseflow survey. J. Hydrol., 217, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilliam, J.W., 1994. Riparian wetlands and water quality. J. Environ. Qual., 23, 896–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilliam, J.W., Parsons, J.E. and Mikkelsen, R.L., 1997. Nitrogen dynamics and buffer zones. In: Haycock, N.E., Burt, T.P., Goulding, K.W.T. and Pinay, G. (eds.), Buffer Zones: Their Processes and Potential in Water Protection, Quest Environmental, Harpenden, 54–61.Google Scholar
Hill, A.R., 1996. Nitrate removal in stream riparian zones. J. Environ. Qual., 25, 743–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jung, K.W., Lee, S.W., Hwang, H.S. and Jang, J.H., 2008. The effects of spatial variability of land use on stream water quality in a coastal watershed. Paddy Water Environ., 6, 275–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lammert, M. and Allan, J.D., 1999. Assessing biotic integrity of streams: effects of scale in measuring the influence of land use/cover and habitat structure on fish and macroinvertebrates. J. Environ. Manage., 23, 257–270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, S.W., Hwang, S.J., Lee, J.K., Jung, D.I., Park, Y.J. and Kim, J.T., 2011. Overview and application of the National Aquatic Ecological Monitoring Program (NAEMP) in Korea. Ann. Limnol. - Int. J. Limnol., 47, S3–S14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenat, D.R. and Crawford, J.K., 1994. Effects of land use on water quality and aquatic biota of three North Carolina Piedmont streams. Hydrobiologia, 294, 185–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, A.J., Tong, S.T.Y. and Goodrich, J.A., 2000. Land use as a mitigation strategy for the water-quality impacts of global warming: a scenario analysis on two watersheds in the Ohio River Basin. Environ. Eng. Policy, 2, 65–76.Google Scholar
MacCauslanda, A. and McTammany, M.E., 2007. The impact of episodic coal mine drainage pollution on benthic macroinvertebrates in streams in the anthracite region of Pennsylvania. Environ. Pollut., 149, 216–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddock, I., 1999. The importance of physical habitat assessment for evaluating river health. Freshwater Biol., 41, 373–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meador, M.R., Coles, J.F. and Zappia, H., 2005. Fish responses to urban intensity gradients in contrasting metropolitan areas: Birmingham, Alabama and Boston, Massachusetts. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp., 47, 409–423.Google Scholar
MOE/NIER, 2008. Survey and evaluation of aquatic ecosystem health in Korea, The Ministry of Environment/National Institute of Environmental Research, Korea (in Korean).
Moore, A.A. and Palmer, M.A., 2005. Invertebrate biodiversity in agricultural and urban headwater streams: implications for conservation and management. Ecol. Appl., 15, 1169–1177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morin, S., Duonga, T.T., Dabrin, A., Coynel, A., Herloryb, O., Baudrimont, M., Delmas, F., Durrieu, G., Schäfer, J., Winterton, P., Blanc, G. and Coste, M., 2008. Long–term survey of heavy–metal pollution, biofilm contamination and benthic diatom community structure in the Riou Mort watershed, south–west France. Environ. Pollut., 151, 532–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naiman, R.J. and Decamps, H., 1990. The Ecology and Management of Aquatic–Terrestrial Ecotones, Parthenon Press, UNESCO, Paris.Google Scholar
Nakamura, K., Nakayama, H., Hideshma, Y., Ishida, T., Ogikibo, J. and Moriwaki, S., 2001. Drainage flows in grass and forest slope lands. In: Proceedings of the JSIRDE Annual Meeting, 44–45.Google Scholar
Nygoye, E. and Machiwa, J.F., 2004. The influence of land–use patterns in the Ruvu River watershed on water quality in the river system. Phys. Chem. Earth Sci., 29, 1161–1166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Omernik, J.M., Abernathy, A.R. and Male, L.M., 1981. Stream nutrient levels and proximity of agricultural and forest land to streams: some relationships. J. Soil Water, 36, 227–231.Google Scholar
Osborne, L.L. and Kovacic, D.A., 1993. Riparian vegetated buffer strips in water–quality restoration and stream management. Freshwater Biol., 9, 243–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poff, N.L. and Ward, J.V., 1990. The physical habitat template of lotic systems: Recovery in the context of historical pattern of spatio-temporal heterogeneity . Environ. Manage., 14, 629–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rankin, E.T., 1989. The Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index: (QHEI); Rationale, Methods, and Application, Environmental Protection Agency.
Ren, W., Zhong, Y., Meligrana, J., Anderson, B., Watt, W.E., Chen, J. and Leung, H., 2003. Urbanization, land use, and water quality in Shanghai 1947–1996. Environ. Int., 29, 649–659.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosenberg, D.M. and Resh, V.H., 1993. Introduction to Freshwater Biomonitoring and Benthic Macroinvertebrates, Chapman and Hall, New York, 194 p.Google Scholar
Sharma, R.C. and Rawat, J.S., 2009. Monitoring of aquatic macroinvertebrates as bioindicators for assessing the health of wetlands: a case study in the Central Himalayas, India. Ecol. Ind., 9, 118–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sliva, L. and Willams, D.D., 2001. Buffer zone versus whole catchment approaches to studying land use impact on river water quality. Water Res., 35, 3462–3472.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steffy, L.Y. and Kilham, S.S., 2006. Effects of urbanization and land use on fish communities in Valley Creek watershed, Chester County, Pennsylvania. Urban Ecosyst., 9, 119–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tkatcheva, V., Hyvärinen, H., Kukkonen, J., Ryzhkov, L.P. and Holopainen, I.J., 2004. Toxic effects of mining effluents on fish gills in a subarctic lake system in NW Russia. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Safety, 57, 278–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tong, S. and Chen, W., 2002. Modeling the relationship between land use and surface water quality. J. Environ. Manage., 66, 377–393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Utz, R.M., Hilderbrand, R.H. and Raesly, R.L., 2010. Regional differences in patterns of fish species loss with changing land use. Biol. Conserv., 143, 688–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, J.B., Eggert, S.L., Meyer, J.L. and Webster, J.R., 1997. Multiple trophic levels of a forest stream linked to terrestrial litter inputs. Science, 277, 102–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, L., Lyons, J., Kanehl, P. and Gatti, R., 1997. Influences of watershed land use on habitat quality and biotic integrity in Wisconsin streams. Fisheries, 22, 6–12.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, L., Lyons, J., Kanehl, P. and Bannerman, R., 2001. Impacts of urbanization on stream habitat and fish across multiple spatial scales. Environ. Manage., 28, 255–266.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weaver, A.L. and Garman, G., 1994. Urbanization of a watershed and historical changes in a stream fish. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc., 123, 162–172.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenger, S., 1999. A Review of the Scientific Literature on Riparian Buffer Width, Extent and Vegetation, Office of Public Service & Outreach Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia.
Woli, K.R., Nagumo, T., Kuramochi, K. and Hatano, R., 2004. Evaluating river water quality through land use analysis and N budget approaches in livestock farming areas. Sci. Total Environ., 329, 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar