Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prioritizing restoration of structural connectivity in rivers: a graph based approach

  • Report
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Longitudinal connectivity is considered a key issue in river management, as it shapes ecological processes from single organisms to populations and ecosystems. Recently, it was shown that network analysis based on spatial graphs has promising applications as a tool for the assessment of connectivity in riverine systems. In this study we used a graph theory approach to identify which barriers most impacted the structural connectivity of a river basin and which connections should preferably be restored or enhanced in order to effectively improve the overall connectivity. An innovative aspect of the proposed methodology is the consideration of the cumulative non-additive impacts produced by barriers, which are especially relevant to organisms of high mobility such as fish. The portuguese river Tagus basin was used as a case study. The cumulative effect of barriers was studied using two approaches: (1) an historical approach in which the impact of barriers was assessed sequentially following the historical succession of construction; (2) a “backward” approach in which barriers were sequentially removed according to their impact. The overall structural connectivity of the river basin decreased to about 50 % of its original value after the major dams were constructed. Results show that it would be necessary to rehabilitate 11 connections in order to increase the overall structural connectivity to 90 % of its original value. This work proposes a novel and straightforward approach to prioritize rehabilitation actions in river systems, providing a promising tool for decision-makers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  • Assis CA (1990) Threats to the survival of anadronous fishes in the river Tagus, Portugal. J Fish Biol 37:225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baranyi G, Saura S, Podani J, Jordán F (2011) Contribution of habitat patches to network connectivity: redundancy and uniqueness of topological indices. Ecol Indic 11:1301–1310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodin Ö, Saura S (2010) Ranking individual habitat patches as connectivity providers: integrating network analysis and patch removal experiments. Ecol Model 221:2393–2405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calabrese JM, Fagan WF (2004) A comparison shoppers’ guide to connectivity metrics: trading off between data requirements and information content. Front Ecol Environ 2:529–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cote D, Kehler DG, Bourne C, Wiersma YF (2010) A new measure of longitudinal connectivity for stream networks. Landscape Ecol 24:101–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dale MRT, Fortin M-J (2010) From graphs to spatial graphs. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41:21–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erös T, Schmera D, Schick RS (2011) Network thinking in riverscape conservation—a graph-based approach. Biol Conserv 144:184–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erös T, Olden JD, Schick RS, Schmera D, Fortin M-J (2012) Characterizing connectivity relationships in freshwaters using patch-based graphs. Landscape Ecol 27:303–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for the community action in the field of water policy. Off J Eur Comm Legis 327:1–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagan WF (2002) Connectivity, fragmentation, and extinction risk in dendritic metapopulations. Ecology 83:3243–3249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L, Merriam G (1985) Habitat patch connectivity and population survival. Ecology 66:1762–1768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fausch KD, Torgersen CE, Baxter CV, Li HW (2002) Landscapes to riverscapes: bridging the gap between research and conservation of stream fishes. Bioscience 52:483–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fullerton AH, Burnett KM, Steel EA, Flicroft RL, Pess GR, Feist BE, Torgersen CE, Miller DJ, Sanderson BL (2010) Hydrological connectivity for riverine fish: measurement challenges and research opportunities. Freshw Biol 55:2215–2237

    Google Scholar 

  • Galpern P, Manseau M, Fall A (2011) Patch-based graphs of landscape connectivity: a guide to construction, analysis and application for conservation. Biol Conserv 144:44–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godinho FN, Ferreira MT (2000) Composition of endemic fish assemblages in relation to exotic species and river regulation in a temperate stream. Biol Invasions 2:231–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant EHC (2011) Structural complexity, movement bias and metapopulation extinction risk in dendritic ecological networks. J N Am Benthol Soc 30:252–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermoso V, Linke S, Prenda J, Possingham HP (2011) Addressing longitudinal connectivity in the systematic conservation planning of fresh waters. Freshw Biol 56:57–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphries PL, Winemiller KO (2009) Historical impacts on river fauna, shifting baselines and challenges for restoration. Bioscience 59:673–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • INAG I.P. (1999) Plano de Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio Tejo. Análise e Diagnóstico da Situação de Referência. Vol I, Síntese, Lisbon

  • Kemp PS, O’Hanley JR (2010) Procedures for evaluating and prioritising the removal of fish passage barriers: a synthesis. Fisheries Manag Ecol 17:297–322

    Google Scholar 

  • Laita A, Kotiaho JS, Mönkkönen M (2011) Graph-theoretic connectivity measures: What do they tell us about connectivity? Landscape Ecol 26:951–967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin SA (1974) Dispersion and population interactions. Am Nat 108:207–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liermann CR, Nilsson C, Robertson J, Ng RY (2012) Implications of dam obstruction for global freshwater fish diversity. Bioscience 62:539–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas MC, Baras E (2001) Migration of freshwater fishes. Blackwell Science, Malden

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH, Wilson EO (1967) The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Mader H, Maier C (2008) A method for prioritizing the reestablishment of river continuity in Austrian rivers. Hydrobiologia 609:277–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam G (1984) Connectivity: a fundamental ecological characteristic of landscape pattern. Proc Int Assoc Landscape Ecol 1:5–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Minor ES, Urban DL (2007) Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. Ecol Appl 17:1771–1782

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Minor ES, Urban DL (2008) A graph-theory framework for evaluating landscape connectivity and conservation planning. Conserv Biol 22:297–307

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O’Hanley JR, Tomberlin D (2005) Optimizing the removal of small fish passage barriers. Environ Model Assess 10:85–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pascual-Hortal L, Saura S (2006) Comparison and development of new graph-based landscape connectivity indices: towards the priorization of habitat patches and corridors for conservation. Landscape Ecol 21:959–967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paul JF (2003) Developing and applying an index of environmental integrity for the US Mid-Atlantic region. J Env Manag 67:175–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pereira M, Segurado P, Neves N (2011) Using spatial network structure in landscape management and planning: a case study with pond turtles. Landscape Urban Plan 100:67–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saura S, Pascual-Hortal L (2007) A new habitat availability index to integrate connectivity in landscape conservation planning: comparison with existing indices and application to a case study. Landscape Urban Plan 83:91–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saura S, Rubio L (2010) A common currency for the different ways in which patches and links can contribute to habitat availability and connectivity in the landscape. Ecography 33:523–537

    Google Scholar 

  • Saura S, Torné J (2009) Conefor Sensinode 2.2: a software package for quantifying the importance of habitat patches for landscape connectivity. Environ Model Softw 24:135–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schick RS, Lindley ST (2007) Directed connectivity among fish populations in a riverine network. J Appl Ecol 44:1116–1126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steel EA, Feist BE, Jensen DW, Pess GR, Sheer MB, Brauner JB, Bilby RE (2004) Landscape models to understand steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) distribution and help prioritize barrier removals in the Willamette basin, Oregon, USA. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 61:999–1011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urban DL, Keitt TH (2001) Landscape connectivity: a graph-theoretic perspective. Ecology 82:1205–1218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urban DL, Minor ES, Treml EA, Schick RS (2009) Graph models of habitat mosaics. Ecol Lett 12:260–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vogt J, Soille P, de Jager A, Rimavičiūtė E, Mehl W, Foisneau S, Bodis K, Dusart J, Paracchini ML, Haastrup P, Bamps C (2007) A pan-European River and Catchment Database. European Commission—JRC, EUR 22920 EN, Luxembourg

  • Ward JV, Tockner K, Arscott DB, Claret C (2002) Riverine landscape diversity. Freshw Biol 47:517–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JA (2002) Riverine landscapes: taking landscape ecology into the water. Freshw Biol 47:501–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

P. Segurado and P. Branco were supported by grants from Fundacão para a Ciência e Tecnologia (SFRH/BPD/39067/2007 and SFRH/BD/44938/2008, respectively). We thank Miguel Pereira for helpful information on graph analysis and two anonymous referees for their fruitful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centro de Estudos Florestais, Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, Tapada da Ajuda, 1349-017, Lisbon, Portugal

    Pedro Segurado, Paulo Branco & Maria T. Ferreira

Authors
  1. Pedro Segurado
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paulo Branco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maria T. Ferreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pedro Segurado.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Segurado, P., Branco, P. & Ferreira, M.T. Prioritizing restoration of structural connectivity in rivers: a graph based approach. Landscape Ecol 28, 1231–1238 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9883-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9883-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation