Search

The Anthropocene presents formidable threats to freshwater ecosystems. Lakes are especially vulnerable and important at the same time. They cover only a small area worldwide but harbour high levels of biodiversity and contribute disproportionately to ecosystem services. Lakes differ with respect to their general type (e.g. land-locked, drainage, floodplain and large lakes) and position in the landscape (e.g. highland versus lowland lakes), which contribute to the dynamics of these systems. Lakes should be generally viewed as 'meta-systems', whereby biodiversity is strongly affected by species dispersal, and ecosystem dynamics are contributed by the flow of matter and substances among locations in a broader waterscape context. Lake connectivity in the waterscape and position in the landscape determine the degree to which a lake is prone to invasion by non-native species and accumulation of harmful substances. Highly connected lakes low in the landscape accumulate nutrients and pollutants originating from ecosystems higher in the landscape. The monitoring and restoration of lake biodiversity and ecosystem services should consider the fact that a high degree of dynamism is present at local, regional and global scales. However, local and regional monitoring may be plagued by the unpredictability of ecological phenomena, hindering adaptive management of lakes. Although monitoring data are increasingly becoming available to study responses of lakes to global change, we still lack suitable integration of models for entire waterscapes. Research across disciplinary boundaries is needed to address the challenges that lakes face in the Anthropocene because they may play an increasingly important role in harbouring unique aquatic biota as well as providing ecosystem goods and services in the future., (© 2020 Cambridge Philosophical Society.)

Climate and land-use change drive a suite of stressors that shape ecosystems and interact to yield complex ecological responses (that is, additive, antagonistic and synergistic effects). We know little about the spatial scales relevant for the outcomes of such interactions and little about effect sizes. These knowledge gaps need to be filled to underpin future land management decisions or climate mitigation interventions for protecting and restoring freshwater ecosystems. This study combines data across scales from 33 mesocosm experiments with those from 14 river basins and 22 cross-basin studies in Europe, producing 174 combinations of paired-stressor effects on a biological response variable. Generalized linear models showed that only one of the two stressors had a significant effect in 39% of the analysed cases, 28% of the paired-stressor combinations resulted in additive effects and 33% resulted in interactive (antagonistic, synergistic, opposing or reversal) effects. For lakes, the frequencies of additive and interactive effects were similar for all spatial scales addressed, while for rivers these frequencies increased with scale. Nutrient enrichment was the overriding stressor for lakes, with effects generally exceeding those of secondary stressors. For rivers, the effects of nutrient enrichment were dependent on the specific stressor combination and biological response variable. These results vindicate the traditional focus of lake restoration and management on nutrient stress, while highlighting that river management requires more bespoke management solutions.