Browsing by Author "Naura, Marc"
Now showing 1 - 10 of 10
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access Application of the Proportion of Sediment-sensitive Invertebrates (PSI) biomonitoring index(Wiley, 2017-11-14) Extence, C. A.; Chadd, R. P.; England, Judy; Naura, Marc; Pickwell, A. G.Sedimentation of river beds is a key pressure impacting riverine ecological communities. Research has identified the need for new approaches to help demonstrate and quantify the impacts of excessive fine-sediment deposition on benthic macroinvertebrate populations. To help meet this requirement, the Proportion of Sediment-sensitive Invertebrates (PSI) methodology was developed and has been in operational use in the United Kingdom for several years. This paper presents a number of case studies, at both national and local scales, showing how the method can be used to identify point and nonpoint fine-sediment pollution, as well as demonstrating the analysis of a national dataset to describe the relationship between PSI and a channel substrate index. A novel approach to displaying PSI data alongside local ecological and hydrological information is also presented and interpreted, to illustrate how improved understanding of biotic and abiotic relationships and interactions can be readily accomplished. Excessive fine-sediment accumulation on river beds results in impaired ecosystem health globally. The case studies and examples presented here will provide confidence that the PSI method can form the basis for evidence gathering and analysis, both within and beyond the United Kingdom. The paper concludes with an overview of the use of PSI in catchment research and management, a consideration of the relationship of the metric with other macroinvertebrate indices, and a summary of refinements recently applied to the index.Item Open Access Assessing the progress of river restoration in the UK: has biophysical condition improved over two decades of intervention?(Wiley, 2021-09-26) Moore, Harriet Elizabeth; Mercer, Theresa G.; de Alwis Pitts, Dilkushi; Beagley, Sam; Naura, Marc; Bryden, AlexandraBiophysical condition is one indicator of the immediate success of efforts to restore degraded rivers as well as longer-term progress towards improving water quality. In the context of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), the biophysical condition of river systems in the UK also reflects how well international environmental policy translates into improved river management domestically. We assess whether the condition of river systems in the UK has improved or declined over the past two decades, whether regions identified by the first WFD assessment have improved or declined, and thus, how effectively international policy has been implemented nationally. Methods include: statistical and spatial analysis of more than 25,000 habitat condition records collated in the River Habitat Survey over the 1990s and 2000s; computing of an Index of Change for Local Authorities; and comparison of Indices of Change with a sub-sample of 1,727 WFD assessments conducted in 258 Local Authorities. Findings include that three of four measures indicate that biophysical quality has declined, although only the decline in one measure (habitat quality) was statistically significant. Riparian quality has improved, although measures do not consider invasive compared to native coverage. In total, 27 regions were identified with the worst declining quality. Comparative analysis of regions suggests that condition has declined most substantially in regions that were previously in “good” condition. Priorities for future investment include improving degraded sites, protecting high quality sites, and increasing monitoring of “data poor” regions. Our methodology offers an approach for utilising “messy” routinely collated data like the RHS. However, guidelines are needed to support the use of similar datasets for the international river restoration community.Item Open Access Best practices for monitoring and assessing the ecological response to river restoration(MDPI, 2021-11-26) England, Judy; Angelopoulos, Natalie; Cooksley, Susan; Dodd, Jennifer; Gill, Andrew B.; Gilvear, David; Johnson, Matthew; Naura, Marc; O’Hare, Matthew; Tree, Angus; Wheeldon, Jennifer; Wilkes, Martin A.Nature-based solutions are widely advocated for freshwater ecosystem conservation and restoration. As increasing amounts of river restoration are undertaken, the need to understand the ecological response to different measures and where measures are best applied becomes more pressing. It is essential that appraisal methods follow a sound scientific approach. Here, experienced restoration appraisal experts review current best practice and academic knowledge to make recommendations and provide guidance that will enable practitioners to gather and analyse meaningful data, using scientific rigor to appraise restoration success. What should be monitored depends on the river type and the type and scale of intervention. By understanding how habitats are likely to change we can anticipate what species, life stages, and communities are likely to be affected. Monitoring should therefore be integrated and include both environmental/habitat and biota assessments. A robust scientific approach to monitoring and appraisal is resource intensive. We recommend that appraisal efforts be directed to where they will provide the greatest evidence, including ‘flagship’ restoration schemes for detailed long-term monitoring. Such an approach will provide the evidence needed to understand which restoration measures work where and ensure that they can be applied with confidence elsewhere.Item Open Access Defining recovery potential in river restoration: a biological data-driven approach(MDPI, 2021-11-24) Wilkes, Martin A.; Mckenzie, Morwenna; Naura, Marc; Allen, Laura; Morris, Mike; Van De Wiel, Marco; Dumbrell, Alex J.; Bani, Alessia; Lashford, Craig; Lavers, Tom; England, JudyScientists and practitioners working on river restoration have made progress on understanding the recovery potential of rivers from geomorphological and engineering perspectives. We now need to build on this work to gain a better understanding of the biological processes involved in river restoration. Environmental policy agendas are focusing on nature recovery, reigniting debates about the use of “natural” reference conditions as benchmarks for ecosystem restoration. We argue that the search for natural or semi-natural analogues to guide restoration planning is inappropriate due to the absence of contemporary reference conditions. With a catchment-scale case study on the invertebrate communities of the Warwickshire Avon, a fifth-order river system in England, we demonstrate an alternative to the reference condition approach. Under our model, recovery potential is quantified based on the gap between observed biodiversity at a site and the biodiversity predicted to occur in that location under alternative management scenarios. We predict that commonly applied restoration measures such as reduced nutrient inputs and the removal of channel resectioning could be detrimental to invertebrate diversity, if applied indiscriminately and without other complementary measures. Instead, our results suggest considerable potential for increases in biodiversity when restoration measures are combined in a way that maximises biodiversity within each water bodyItem Open Access Editorial: Scientific advances in river restoration(Wiley, 2025-01) Prady, Jane; Austin, Sam; Dodd, Jennifer; White, James; Wilkes, Martin; Naura, MarcIn September 2023, the River Restoration Centre (RRC) hosted the inaugural Scientific Advances in River Restoration (SARR) conference in collaboration with the University of Liverpool, UK. As we confront the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity loss, this event underscored the importance of global collaboration among river restoration scientists to help inform evidence‐led solutions. Fluvial systems are particularly vulnerable to global climatic pressures, with droughts and floods exacerbating the impacts of human‐induced river modifications. River restoration is a crucial tool in addressing these pervasive challenges, capable of benefiting both people (e.g., flood mitigation, community engagement) and nature (e.g., ecological recovery, ecosystem functionality). The SARR conference aimed to unite scientists from various disciplines and countries, foster collaborations, and highlight new advancements to enhance global progress in river restoration science. This river restoration special issue features a diverse selection of papers presented at the SARR conference, showcasing the multidisciplinary nature of contemporary river restoration.Item Open Access Human impacts mediate freshwater invertebrate community responses to and recovery from drought(Wiley, 2024-11-01) Sarremejane, Romain; England, Judy; Dunbar, Mike; Brown, Rosalind; Naura, Marc; Stubbington, RachelDrought is an increasing risk to the biodiversity within rivers—ecosystems which are already impacted by human activities. However, the long‐term spatially replicated studies needed to generate understanding of how anthropogenic stressors alter ecological responses to drought are lacking. We studied aquatic invertebrate communities in 2500 samples collected from 179 sites on rivers emerging from England's chalk aquifer over three decades. We tested two sets of alternative hypotheses describing responses to and recovery from drought in interaction with human impacts affecting water quality, fine sediment, water temperature, channel morphology, flow and temporal change in land use. We summarized communities using taxa richness, an index indicating tolerance of anthropogenic degradation (average score per taxon, ASPT) and deviation from the average composition. Responses to drought were altered by interactions with human impacts. Poor water quality exacerbated drought‐driven reductions in taxa richness. Drought‐driven deviations from the average community composition were reduced and enhanced at sites impacted by flow augmentation (e.g. effluent releases) and flow reduction (e.g. abstraction), respectively. Human impacts altered post‐drought recovery. Increases in richness were lower at sites impacted by water abstraction and higher at sites with augmented flows, in particular as recovery trajectories extended beyond 3 years. ASPT recovered faster at sites that gained woodland compared to urban land, due to their greater recovery potential, that is, their lower drought‐driven minimum values and higher post‐drought maximum values. Synthesis and applications. We show that communities in river ecosystems exposed to human impacts—in particular poor water quality, altered flow volumes and land use change—are particularly vulnerable to drought. These results provide evidence that management actions taken to enhance water quality, regulate abstraction and restore riparian land use could promote ecological resilience to drought in groundwater‐dominated rivers such as globally rare chalk streams and other rivers of the Anthropocene, as they adapt to a future characterized by increasing climatic extremity.Item Restricted A new framework for river restoration planning at catchment scale in the UK(Wiley, 2025-01) Robins, Joshua Edward; Naura, Marc; Austin, Sam; Bryden, Alexandra; Cullis, Jo; Prady, Jane; Shi, Fang; Treves, RichardThe main aim of catchment planning is to prioritise measures that will reverse the decline of biological communities. In recent decades, there has been an increase in methods, tools and the availability of data to aid this process. However, how we use data to make decisions is the crucial and often neglected part of catchment planning, and there is sometimes a tendency to revert to reach‐scale opportunism rather than planning at the catchment scale. Planning approaches in the UK have ranged from public sector–led plans in the 1990s to the present‐day partnership approach led by the third sector (non‐governmental charitable or not‐for‐profit organisations). We have reviewed 237 catchment plans from the UK to understand the approaches that have been taken. Our findings indicate that many plans do not clearly link evidence and data to decision‐making; problems are poorly defined using broad terms such as ‘issues’ instead of characterising pressures and impacts; catchment objectives tend to be broad and not specific; measures are often prioritised based on opportunity; and it is not always clear how measures are expected to contribute to the achievement of catchment targets. Altogether, we noted the absence of agreed, standardised frameworks for producing plans, describing how data should be analysed, problems identified and actions prioritised. We propose a new catchment planning framework that encourages evidence‐based decisions through the assessment of pressures and impacts, and ultimately the prioritisation of river restoration options (encompassing rehabilitation, renaturalisation, enhancement, re‐creation and mitigation of the hydrology, water quality and geomorphology of the river, floodplain and wider catchment) based on their contribution to the alleviation of catchment‐scale impacts, and which can be applied by nonspecialists using citizen science data.Item Open Access Rivers as natural capital assets: a quick scoping review to assess the evidence linking river asset condition to changes in the flow of ecosystem services(Wiley, 2025) Zini, Valentina; Johnson, Natalie; Crouch, Alice; Lenagan, Gerard; Cooper, Chris; Naura, Marc; Speck, Imogen; Rouquette, JimRiver managers are beginning to adopt natural capital approaches in practice. However, while it is crucial for river management, the link between river asset condition and the flow of ecosystem services is poorly understood. In this study, we conducted a Quick Scoping Review (QSR) of the research into river asset condition and ecosystem service delivery to explore the current state of knowledge. The review team developed a PICO (Population, Intervention, Control, Outcome) model to transpose the concepts of the research enquiry into a search strategy for the evidence base and used a Delphi screening exercise to prioritise a subset of literature for the narrative findings. VOSviewer was used to analyse the high‐level linguistic themes from the full list of references. This co‐designed, collaborative and objective QSR approach allowed us to examine a large body of literature in a reproducible manner while minimising bias, demonstrating best practice for evidence review that should be continuously updated, generating a ‘living evidence’ knowledge asset. The results of the review demonstrate there is some knowledge of the mechanisms linking the condition of river assets to the delivery of ecosystem services for the majority of the broad range of ecosystem services analysed, with the exception of some of the cultural services, where comparatively fewer studies explore this link. However, a clear understanding of the quantitative evidence of the relationships between condition and ecosystem service delivery is missing for all of the ecosystem services. This gap stems from a lack of standardised methodologies used across the studies and a focus on a narrow range of definitions of condition. The gap needs to be addressed in future research on the topic, and a first step is to adopt more standardised indicators of river asset condition.Item Unknown Seeking river restoration appraisal best practice: supporting wider national and international(Wiley, 2019-08-13) England, Judy; Naura, Marc; Mant, Jenny; Skinner, KevinWith growing investment in river restoration, we increasingly need to justify costs by demonstrating success and wider benefits of measures. To aid practitioners, the UK River Restoration Centre (RRC) has worked with experts to develop a practical monitoring guidance (PRAGMO) that links objectives to specific monitoring to demonstrate achievable outcomes. Feedback, however, via an on‐line questionnaire highlighted the need to rationalise the guidance contents for a new growing audience, taking advantage of new developments and incorporating the evaluation of social and economic aspects of river restoration. With these potential improvements, it is hoped that practitioners will follow this guidance, improve the quality of monitoring undertaken and share evidence of success and lessons learnt. This paper outlines how this guidance has been adopted as best practice. We discuss why we need to embed this guidance into wider monitoring protocols that can feed into national and international environmental policy and targets.Item Open Access Small Water Bodies in Great Britain and Ireland: Ecosystem function, human-generated degradation, and options for restorative action(Elsevier, 2018-07-26) Riley, William D.; Potter, Edward C. E.; Biggs, Jeremy; Collins, Adrian L.; Jarvie, Helen P.; Jones, J. Iwan; Kelly-Quinn, Mary; Ormerod, Steve J.; Sear, David A.; Wilby, Robert L.; Broadmeadow, Samantha; Brown, Colin D.; Chanin, Paul; Copp, Gordon H.; Cowx, Ian G.; Grogan, Adam; Hornby, Duncan D.; Huggett, Duncan; Kelly, Martyn G.; Naura, Marc; Newman, Jonathan R.; Siriwardena, Gavin M.Small, 1st and 2nd-order, headwater streams and ponds play essential roles in providing natural flood control, trapping sediments and contaminants, retaining nutrients, and maintaining biological diversity, which extend into downstream reaches, lakes and estuaries. However, the large geographic extent and high connectivity of these small water bodies with the surrounding terrestrial ecosystem makes them particularly vulnerable to growing land-use pressures and environmental change. The greatest pressure on the physical processes in these waters has been their extension and modification for agricultural and forestry drainage, resulting in highly modified discharge and temperature regimes that have implications for flood and drought control further downstream. The extensive length of the small stream network exposes rivers to a wide range of inputs, including nutrients, pesticides, heavy metals, sediment and emerging contaminants. Small water bodies have also been affected by invasions of non-native species, which along with the physical and chemical pressures, have affected most groups of organisms with consequent implications for the wider biodiversity within the catchment. Reducing the impacts and restoring the natural ecosystem function of these water bodies requires a three-tiered approach based on: restoration of channel hydromorphological dynamics; restoration and management of the riparian zone; and management of activities in the wider catchment that have both point-source and diffuse impacts. Such activities are expensive and so emphasis must be placed on integrated programmes that provide multiple benefits. Practical options need to be promoted through legislative regulation, financial incentives, markets for resource services and voluntary codes and actions.