, Volume 763, Issue 1, pp 285–299 | Cite as

Controlling for hydrologic connectivity to assess the importance of catchment- and reach-scale factors on macroinvertebrate community structure

  • Alison N. Hale
  • Grace Noble
  • Kaitlin Piper
  • Keith Garmire
  • Stephen J. Tonsor
Primary Research Paper


Understanding landscape influences on stream ecosystems is a challenging task due to the spatial complexity and connectedness of stream networks. Here, we control for longitudinal connectivity to provide a robust test of the relative importance of reach- and catchment-scale factors in determining macroinvertebrate community structure in southwestern Pennsylvania streams. We determined that sites separated by ≤510 m along the stream network had significantly correlated macroinvertebrate community scores. After controlling for this spatial autocorrelation, a partial least squares regression identified two factors that together accounted for 32% of the variation in community scores. In this model, two reach-scale factors—habitat assessment score and stream pH—were the most important factors for predicting a stream’s macroinvertebrate community score. However, landscape diversity was also important. Landscape diversity is a catchment-scale factor that was highly correlated with percent pasture/hay and measures of habitat fragmentation. Our results provide support for the idea that stream communities in undisturbed areas are heavily influenced by reach-scale characteristics. Furthermore, our results indicate that Pennsylvania natural resource managers should consider habitat score and stream pH after accounting for spatial autocorrelation when identifying restoration targets for impacted streams.


Land use Hydrologic connectivity Spatial autocorrelation Benthic macroinvertebrates Pennsylvania Total Biological Score 



We thank the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection for funding this research (Disclaimer: The views expressed in this manuscript do not necessarily reflect the views of this agency). We thank Tom Hann and Lucy Powell for their help in delineating watersheds, calculating catchment land use, and for assistance with preliminary analyses. We also thank Anthony Iannacchione and Erin Pfeil-McCullough for their assistance with data interpretation. Lastly, we thank Dan Bain for assistance with data analysis, interpretation, and for his comments on draft versions of this manuscript.

Supplementary material

10750_2015_2385_MOESM1_ESM.docx (65 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 65 kb)


  1. Allan, J. D., 2004. Landscapes and riverscapes: the influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 35: 257–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arango, C. P. & J. L. Tank, 2008. Land use influences the spatiotemporal controls on nitrification and denitrification in headwater streams. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 27: 90–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Astorga, A., J. Oksanen, M. Luoto, J. Soininen, R. Virtanen & T. Muotka, 2012. Distance decay of similarity in freshwater communities: do macro- and microorganisms follow the same rules? Global Ecology and Biogeography 21: 365–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbour, M. T., Gerritsen, J., Snyder, B. D., & Stribling, J. B., 1999. Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and wadeable rivers: periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrates and fish. 2nd edition. EPA 841-B-99-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  5. Berenzen, N., T. Kumke, H. K. Schulz & R. Schulz, 2005. Macroinvertebrate community structure in agricultural streams: impact of runoff-related pesticide contamination. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 60: 37–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bernot, M. J., D. J. Sobota, R. O. Hall Jr, P. J. Mulholland, W. K. Dodds, J. R. Webster, J. L. Tank, L. R. Ashkenas, L. W. Cooper, C. N. Dahm, S. V. Gregory, N. B. Grimm, S. K. Hamilton, S. L. Johnson, W. H. McDowell, J. L. Meyer, B. Peterson, G. C. Poole, H. M. Valett, C. Arango, J. J. Beaulieu, A. J. Burgin, C. Crenshaw, A. M. Helton, L. Johnson, J. Merriam, B. R. Niederlehner, J. M. O’Brien, J. D. Potter, R. W. Sheibley, S. M. Thomas & K. Wilson, 2010. Inter-regional comparison of land-use effects on stream metabolism. Freshwater Biology 55: 1874–1890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bonada, N., S. Dolédec & B. Statzner, 2012. Spatial autocorrelation patterns of stream invertebrates: exogenous and endogenous factors. Journal of Biogeography 39: 56–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Braun, E. L., 1950. Deciduous forests of eastern North America. Hafner Press, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Brown, B. L. & C. M. Swan, 2010. Dendritic network structure constrains metacommunity properties in riverine ecosystems. Journal of Animal Ecology 79: 571–580.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Bunn, S. E., P. M. Davies & T. D. Mosisch, 1999. Ecosystem measures of river health and their response to riparian and catchment degradation. Freshwater Biology 41: 333–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burton, J. & J. Gerritsen, 2003. A stream condition index for Virginia non-coastal streams. Tetra Tech Inc, Owings Mills, Maryland.Google Scholar
  12. Carrascal, L. M., I. Galván & O. Gordo, 2009. Partial least squares regression as an alternative to current regression methods used in ecology. Oikos 118: 681–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dudgeon, D., A. H. Arthington, M. O. Gessner, Z.-I. Kawabata, D. J. Knowler, C. Lévêque, R. J. Naiman, A.-H. Prieur-Richard, D. Soto, M. L. J. Stiassny & C. A. Sullivan, 2006. Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biological Reviews 81: 163–182.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Foley, J. A., R. DeFries, G. P. Asner, C. Barford, G. Bonan, S. R. Carpenter, F. S. Chapin, M. T. Coe, G. C. Daily, H. K. Gibbs, J. H. Helkowski, T. Holloway, E. A. Howard, C. J. Kucharik, C. Monfreda, J. A. Patz, I. C. Prentice, N. Ramankutty & P. K. Snyder, 2005. Global consequences of land use. Science 309: 570–574.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Finlay, J. C., 2011. Stream size and human influences on ecosystem production in river networks. Ecosphere 2(8): article 87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fry, J., G. Xian, S. Jin, J. Dewitz, C. Homer, L. Yang, C. Barnes, N. Herold & J. Wickham, 2011. Completion of the 2006 National Land Cover Database for the conterminous United States. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 77: 858–864.Google Scholar
  17. Genito, D., W. J. Gburek & A. N. Sharpley, 2002. Response of stream macroinvertebrates to agricultural land cover in a small watershed. Journal of Freshwater Ecology 17: 109–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gerritsen, J., J. Burton & M. T. Barbour, 2000. A stream condition index for West Virginia wadeable streams. Tetra Tech Inc, Owings Mills, Maryland.Google Scholar
  19. Grenouillet, G., S. Brosse, L. Tudesque, S. Lek, Y. Baraillé & G. Loot, 2008. Concordance among stream assemblages and spatial autocorrelation along a fragmented gradient. Diversity and Distributions 14: 592–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Griffith, M. B., E. M. Barrows & S. A. Perry, 1998. Lateral dispersal of adult aquatic insects (Plecoptera, Trichoptera) following emergence from headwater streams in forested Appalachian catchments. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 91: 195–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hawkins, C. P., J. R. Olson & R. A. Hill, 2010. The reference condition: predicting benchmarks for ecological and water-quality assessments. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 29: 312–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Heino, J., 2009. Biodiversity of aquatic insects: spatial gradients and environmental correlates of assemblage-level measures at large scales. Freshwater Reviews 2: 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hopkins, R. L., 2009. Use of landscape pattern metrics and multiscale data in aquatic species distribution models: a case study of a freshwater mussel. Landscape Ecology 24: 943–955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hopkins, R. L. & B. M. Burr, 2009. Modeling freshwater fish distributions using multiscale landscape data: a case study of six narrow range endemics. Ecological Modelling 220: 2024–2034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Johnson, L. B. & G. E. Host, 2010. Recent developments in landscape approaches for the study of aquatic ecosystems. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 29: 41–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Johnson, R. K., M. T. Furse, D. Hering & L. Sandin, 2007. Ecological relationships between stream communities and spatial scale: implications for designing catchment-level monitoring programs. Freshwater Biology 52: 939–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jones, J. I., J. F. Murphy, A. L. Collins, D. A. Sear, P. S. Naden & P. D. Armitage, 2012. Impact of fine sediment on macroinvertebrates. River Research Application 28: 1055–1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. King, R. S., M. E. Baker, D. F. Whigham, D. E. Weller, T. E. Jordan, P. F. Kazyak & M. K. Hurd, 2005. Spatial considerations for linking watershed land cover to ecological indicators in streams. Ecological Applications 15: 137–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Klemm, D. J., K. A. Blocksom, F. A. Fulk, A. T. Herlihy, R. M. Hughes, P. R. Kaufmann, D. V. Peck, J. L. Stoddard, W. T. Thoeny & M. B. Griffith, 2003. Development and evaluation of a macroinvertebrate biotic integrity index (MBII) for regionally assessing mid-Atlantic Highlands streams. Environmental Management 31: 656–669.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Koenig, W. D., 1999. Spatial autocorrelation of ecological phenomena. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 14: 22–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Landeiro, V. L., L. M. Bini, A. S. Melo, A. M. O. Pes & W. E. Magnusson, 2012. The roles of dispersal limitation and environmental conditions in controlling caddisfly (Trichoptera) assemblages. Freshwater Biology 57: 1554–1564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Legendre, P. & L. Legendre, 2012. Numerical Ecology. 3rd edition. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  33. Li, J., A. Herlihy, W. Gerth, P. Kaufman, S. Gregory, S. Urquhart & D. P. Larsen, 2001. Variability in stream macroinvertebrates at multiple spatial scales. Freshwater Biology 46: 87–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Liess, M. & R. Schulz, 1999. Linking insecticide contamination and population response in an agricultural stream. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18: 1948–1955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lloyd, N. J., R. Mac Nally & P. S. Lake, 2005. Spatial autocorrelation of assemblages of benthic invertebrates and its relationship to environmental factors in two upland rivers in southeastern Australia. Diversity and Distributions 11: 375–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Macneale, K. H., B. L. Peckarsky & G. E. Likens, 2005. Stable isotopes identify dispersal patterns of stonefly populations living along stream corridors. Freshwater Biology 50: 1117–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Malmqvist, B., 2002. Aquatic macroinvertebrates in riverine landscapes. Freshwater Biology 47: 679–694.  Google Scholar
  38. Onderka, M., S. Wrede, M. Rodný, L. Pfister, L. Hoffman & A. Krein, 2012. Hydrogeologic and landscape controls of dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) and dissolved silica (DSi) fluxes in heterogeneous catchments. Journal of Hydrology 450–51: 36–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. PADEP (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection), 2005. Surface water protection—underground bituminous coal mining operations. Technical Guidance Document 563-2000-655. Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Mining and Reclamation, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
  40. Peterson, E. E. & J. M. Ver Hoef, 2010. A mixed-model moving-average approach to geostatistical modeling in stream networks. Ecology 91: 644–651.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Poff, N. L., 1997. Landscape filters and species traits: towards mechanistic understanding and prediction in stream ecology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16: 391–409.Google Scholar
  42. Riseng, C. M., M. J. Wiley, R. W. Black & M. D. Munn, 2011. Impacts of agricultural land use on biological integrity: a causal analysis. Ecological Applications 21: 3128–3146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Roth, N. E., J. D. Allan & D. L. Erickson, 1996. Landscape influences on stream biotic integrity assessed at multiple spatial scales. Landscape Ecology 11: 141–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rouquette, J. R., M. Dallimer, P. R. Armsworth, K. J. Gaston, L. Maltby & P. H. Warren, 2013. Species turnover and geographic distance in an urban river network. Diversity and Distributions 19: 1429–1439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Roy, A. H., A. D. Rosemond, M. J. Paul, D. S. Leigh & J. B. Wallace, 2003. Stream macroinvertebrate response to catchment urbanization (Georgia, U.S.A.). Freshwater Biology 48: 329–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. SAS Institute Inc., 2008. The PLS procedure. In SAS/STAT® 9.2 User’s Guide. SAS Institute In, Cary, NC: 4760–4807.Google Scholar
  47. Scanlon, B. R., I. Jolly, M. Sophocleous & L. Zhang, 2007. Global impacts of conversions from natural to agricultural ecosystems on water resources: quantity versus quality. Water Resources Research 43: W03437. doi: 10.1029/2006WR005486.Google Scholar
  48. Shurin, J. B., K. Cottenie & H. Hillebrand, 2009. Spatial autocorrelation and dispersal limitation in freshwater organisms. Oecologia 159: 151–159.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Song, M.-Y., F. Leprieur, A. Thomas, S. Lek-Ang, T.-S. Chon & S. Lek, 2009. Impact of agricultural land use on aquatic insect assemblages in the Garonne river catchment (SW France). Aquatic Ecology 43: 999–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stephenson, J. M. & A. Morin, 2009. Covariation of stream community structure and biomass of algae, invertebrates, and fish with forest cover at multiple spatial scales. Freshwater Biology 54: 2139–2154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Stoddard, J. L., D. P. Larsen, C. P. Hawkins, R. K. Johnson & R. H. Norris, 2006. Setting expectations for the ecological condition of streams: the concept of the reference condition. Ecological Applications 16: 1267–1276.Google Scholar
  52. Tonsor, S. J., Hale, A. N., Iannacchione, A., Bain, D. J., Keener, M., Pfeil-McCullough, E., & Garmire, K., 2014. The effects of subsidence resulting from underground bituminous coal mining, 2008–2013.
  53. Townsend, C. R., S. Dolédec, R. Norris, K. Peacock & C. Arbuckle, 2003. The influence of scale and geography on relationships between stream community composition and landscape variables: description and prediction. Freshwater Biology 48: 768–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Urban, M. C., D. K. Skelly, D. Burchsted, W. Price & S. Lowry, 2006. Stream communities across a rural-urban landscape gradient. Diversity and Distributions 12: 337–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. U. S. Geological Survey, 2000. 7.5 minute digital elevation models (DEM) for Pennsylvania 10 meter. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.Google Scholar
  56. Vinson, M. R. & C. P. Hawkins, 1998. Biodiversity of stream insects: variation at local, basin, and regional scales. Annual Review of Entomology 43: 271–293.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Wagner, W. R., Heyman, L., Gray, R. E., Belz, D. J., Lund, R., Cate, A. S., & Edgerton, C. D., 1970. Geology of the Pittsburgh area. General Geology Report 59, Pennsylvania Geological Survey, Fourth Series. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Harrisburg, PA.Google Scholar
  58. Walsh, C. J., A. H. Roy, J. W. Feminella, P. D. Cottingham, P. M. Groffman & R. P. Morgan II, 2005. The urban stream syndrome: current knowledge and the search for a cure. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 14: 706–723.Google Scholar
  59. Wang, L., J. Lyons, P. Rasmussen, P. Seelbach, T. Simon, M. Wiley, P. Kanehl, E. Baker, S. Niemela & P. M. Stewart, 2003. Watershed, reach, and riparian influences on stream fish assemblages in the Northern Lakes and Forest Ecoregion, U.S.A. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 60: 491–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wang, L., P. W. Seelbach & J. Lyons, 2006. Effects of levels of human disturbance on the influence of catchment, riparian, and reach-scale factors on fish assemblages. In Hughes, R. M., L. Wang & P. Sellbach (eds), Landscape Influences on Stream Habitats and Biological Assemblages. Symposium 48. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD: 199–219.Google Scholar
  61. Ward, J. V., 1989. The four-dimensional nature of lotic ecosystems. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 8: 2–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Weigel, B. M., L. Wang, P. W. Rasmussen, J. T. Butcher, P. M. Stewart, T. P. Simon & M. J. Wiley, 2003. Relative influence of variables at multiple spatial scales on stream macroinvertebrates in the Northern Lakes and Forest ecoregion, U.S.A. Freshwater Biology 48: 1440–1461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Yan, B., N. F. Fang, P. C. Zhang & Z. H. Shi, 2013. Impacts of land use change on watershed streamflow and sediment yield: an assessment using hydrologic modelling and partial least squares regression. Journal of Hydrology 484: 26–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Zhang, Y., D. Dudgeon, D. Cheng, W. Thoe, L. Fok, Z. Wang & J. H. W. Lee, 2010. Impacts of land use and water quality on macroinvertebrate communities in the Pearl River drainage basin, China. Hydrobiologia 652: 71–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.Center for Biodiversity & EcosystemsCarnegie Museum of Natural HistoryPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations