Multi-decadal improvements in the ecological quality of European rivers are not consistently reflected in biodiversity metrics.

Humans impact terrestrial, marine and freshwater ecosystems, yet many broad-scale studies have found no systematic, negative biodiversity changes (for example, decreasing abundance or taxon richness). Here we show that mixed biodiversity responses may arise because community metrics show variable responses to anthropogenic impacts across broad spatial scales. We first quantified temporal trends in anthropogenic impacts for 1,365 riverine invertebrate communities from 23 European countries, based on similarity to least-impacted reference communities. Reference comparisons provide necessary, but often missing, baselines for evaluating whether communities are negatively impacted or have improved (less or more similar, respectively). We then determined whether changing impacts were consistently reflected in metrics of community abundance, taxon richness, evenness and composition. Invertebrate communities improved, that is, became more similar to reference conditions, from 1992 until the 2010s, after which improvements plateaued. Improvements were generally reflected by higher taxon richness, providing evidence that certain community metrics can broadly indicate anthropogenic impacts. However, richness responses were highly variable among sites, and we found no consistent responses in community abundance, evenness or composition. These findings suggest that, without sufficient data and careful metric selection, many common community metrics cannot reliably reflect anthropogenic impacts, helping explain the prevalence of mixed biodiversity trends.

A Bayesian Belief Network learning tool integrates multi-scale effects of riparian buffers on stream invertebrates.

Riparian forest buffers have multiple benefits for biodiversity and ecosystem services in both freshwater and terrestrial habitats but are rarely implemented in water ecosystem management, partly reflecting the lack of information on the effectiveness of this measure. In this context, social learning is valuable to inform stakeholders of the efficacy of riparian vegetation in mitigating stream degradation. We aim to develop a Bayesian belief network (BBN) model for application as a learning tool to simulate and assess the reach- and segment-scale effects of riparian vegetation properties and land use on instream invertebrates. We surveyed reach-scale riparian conditions, extracted segment-scale riparian and subcatchment land use information from geographic information system data, and collected macroinvertebrate samples from four catchments in Europe (Belgium, Norway, Romania, and Sweden). We modelled the ecological condition based on the Average Score Per Taxon (ASPT) index, a macroinvertebrate-based index widely used in European bioassessment, as a function of different riparian variables using the BBN modelling approach. The results of the model simulations provided insights into the usefulness of riparian vegetation attributes in enhancing the ecological condition, with reach-scale riparian vegetation quality associated with the strongest improvements in ecological status. Specifically, reach-scale buffer vegetation of score 3 (i.e. moderate quality) generally results in the highest probability of a good ASPT score (99-100%). In contrast, a site with a narrow width of riparian trees and a small area of trees with reach-scale buffer vegetation of score 1 (i.e. low quality) predicts a high probability of a bad ASPT score (74%). The strengths of the BBN model are the ease of interpretation, fast simulation, ability to explicitly indicate uncertainty in model outcomes, and interactivity. These merits point to the potential use of the BBN model in workshop activities to stimulate key learning processes that help inform the management of riparian zones.