東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back to Search results for [ null ]

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Evaluating and Prioritizing Stream R...

Miller, Eric Mitchell.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Evaluating and Prioritizing Stream Restoration in Mined Appalachian Watersheds.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Evaluating and Prioritizing Stream Restoration in Mined Appalachian Watersheds./
Author:	Miller, Eric Mitchell.
Description:	141 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-12(E), Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International76-12B(E).
Subject:	Aquatic sciences. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3718516
ISBN:	9781321983715

Evaluating and Prioritizing Stream Restoration in Mined Appalachian Watersheds.
Miller, Eric Mitchell.

Evaluating and Prioritizing Stream Restoration in Mined Appalachian Watersheds. - 141 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-12(E), Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--West Virginia University, 2015.

The state of West Virginia requires stream mitigation to offset anthropogenic impacts to streams; consequently there is a high concentration of mitigation projects in the mountaintop mining/valley fill region. Projects are typically outside mine boundaries and sites are selected at the discretion of the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection. This dissertation evaluated current in-stream, natural channel design (NCD) structures and prioritized future project locations. First, we assessed the Little Coal River, which is one of the largest physical restoration projects in the state. The Little Coal drains 994 km2 with extensive historic and contemporary coal mining. The objectives of our study were to quantify the effects of in-stream structure construction on stream channel morphology, fish habitat quality, sediment composition, bank stability, fish, and macroinvertebrate assemblages and to determine the extent to which benefits persisted over our study period (5 years). Our results indicate that the beneficial effects of structures include: improved fish habitat quality, increased bed complexity, and increased substrate diversity. Post-construction fish habitat quality and streambed complexity, although dynamic, appear to be relatively stable over time. We observed significant localized macroinvertebrate response to restoration that was mediated by shifts from sand dominated substrates to cobble and gravel. However, overall improvements to invertebrate assemblages at the river reach scale were not observed, because restoration did not affect substrate composition at the larger scale. In contrast, we did observe reach-scale effects of restoration on fish assemblages. However, the overall response was difficult to interpret as being ecologically beneficial or not. Total fish biomass, total abundance, and sucker abundance increased in response to NCD structure construction. Fish species richness and integrity measures remained unchanged, and gamefish abundance decreased on the Little Coal River. Second, we expanded our region and assessed the biological and physical responses to 14 restoration projects in an intensively mined region. Our results suggest that typical restoration practices consistently improve physical habitat quality regardless of drainage area. Restored reaches generally have higher habitat condition scores than adjacent reference reaches and tend to be higher than the average reach in the region. In contrast, macroinvertebrate assemblages demonstrated no measurable positive response to physical habitat restoration, regardless of drainage area, water quality, or the condition of neighboring streams. Fish assemblage response to restoration was strongly context dependent. Restoration projects on smaller streams (i.e. < 50 km2 drainage area) with lower electrical conductivity (< 1000 mus/cm) tended to result in a more positive response by fishes than projects on small, highly conductive streams. However, the most consistent response by fishes to restoration was an increased abundance and biomass of tolerant taxa.

ISBN: 9781321983715Subjects--Topical Terms:

3174300
Aquatic sciences.

Evaluating and Prioritizing Stream Restoration in Mined Appalachian Watersheds.
LDR:04009nmm a2200289 4500 001 2072451
005 20160808080357.5
008 170521s2015 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781321983715
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3718516
035 $a AAI3718516
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Miller, Eric Mitchell. $3 3187632
245 1 0 $a Evaluating and Prioritizing Stream Restoration in Mined Appalachian Watersheds.
300 $a 141 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-12(E), Section: B.
500 $a Adviser: J. Todd Petty.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--West Virginia University, 2015.
520 $a The state of West Virginia requires stream mitigation to offset anthropogenic impacts to streams; consequently there is a high concentration of mitigation projects in the mountaintop mining/valley fill region. Projects are typically outside mine boundaries and sites are selected at the discretion of the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection. This dissertation evaluated current in-stream, natural channel design (NCD) structures and prioritized future project locations. First, we assessed the Little Coal River, which is one of the largest physical restoration projects in the state. The Little Coal drains 994 km2 with extensive historic and contemporary coal mining. The objectives of our study were to quantify the effects of in-stream structure construction on stream channel morphology, fish habitat quality, sediment composition, bank stability, fish, and macroinvertebrate assemblages and to determine the extent to which benefits persisted over our study period (5 years). Our results indicate that the beneficial effects of structures include: improved fish habitat quality, increased bed complexity, and increased substrate diversity. Post-construction fish habitat quality and streambed complexity, although dynamic, appear to be relatively stable over time. We observed significant localized macroinvertebrate response to restoration that was mediated by shifts from sand dominated substrates to cobble and gravel. However, overall improvements to invertebrate assemblages at the river reach scale were not observed, because restoration did not affect substrate composition at the larger scale. In contrast, we did observe reach-scale effects of restoration on fish assemblages. However, the overall response was difficult to interpret as being ecologically beneficial or not. Total fish biomass, total abundance, and sucker abundance increased in response to NCD structure construction. Fish species richness and integrity measures remained unchanged, and gamefish abundance decreased on the Little Coal River. Second, we expanded our region and assessed the biological and physical responses to 14 restoration projects in an intensively mined region. Our results suggest that typical restoration practices consistently improve physical habitat quality regardless of drainage area. Restored reaches generally have higher habitat condition scores than adjacent reference reaches and tend to be higher than the average reach in the region. In contrast, macroinvertebrate assemblages demonstrated no measurable positive response to physical habitat restoration, regardless of drainage area, water quality, or the condition of neighboring streams. Fish assemblage response to restoration was strongly context dependent. Restoration projects on smaller streams (i.e. < 50 km2 drainage area) with lower electrical conductivity (< 1000 mus/cm) tended to result in a more positive response by fishes than projects on small, highly conductive streams. However, the most consistent response by fishes to restoration was an increased abundance and biomass of tolerant taxa.
590 $a School code: 0256.
650 4 $a Aquatic sciences. $3 3174300
650 4 $a Environmental science. $3 677245
650 4 $a Environmental management. $3 535182
690 $a 0792
690 $a 0768
690 $a 0474
710 2 $a West Virginia University. $b Davis College of Argriculture, Natural Resources, & Design. $3 2098241
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 76-12B(E).
790 $a 0256
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2015
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3718516