Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

The mayflies are sending us a warning about urban wildfires

News Feed
Monday, September 16, 2024

A tiny, vibrant world thrives along the rocky bottom of most streams. As sunlight filters through the water, mayfly nymphs, no larger than your fingernail, cling to algae-coated cobbles. Six spindly legs anchor them against the current, while feathery gills wave gently, drawing oxygen from the flowing water.Subscribe for unlimited access to The PostYou can cancel anytime.SubscribeThis scene is common in well-maintained creeks and streams that flow through populated areas. But when wildfires sweep through, the toxic materials left behind can devastate this ecosystem.When you think of urban wildfires, you might picture charred trees and houses. But beneath the surface of nearby streams, fires can also cause a silent upheaval — one that affects populations of creatures that are important indicators of the water’s health.Wildfires are a natural part of many ecosystems. They rejuvenate landscapes by clearing out dead brush and releasing nutrients from vegetation and soils.When fires move from nature into neighborhoods, however, they encounter a drastically different set of fuels. Urban conflagrations consume a mix of synthetic and natural materials, including homes, vehicles, electronics and household chemicals. This creates a unique set of problems that can have far-reaching consequences for waterways and the creatures that call them home.As an environmental engineer, I study how human actions on land affect the chemistry and ecology of surface water systems, including an important group of stream dwellers: benthic macroinvertebrates. These tiny creatures, which include mayflies, stoneflies and caddisflies, are not only food sources for fish and other stream life but also serve as nature’s own water quality monitors.The author collects samples from a stream. (Adam King)The Camp Fire’s wake-up callIn November 2018, the Camp Fire devastated the town of Paradise, Calif., destroying over 14,000 homes and other structures. In the aftermath, my colleagues and I examined the effects of large-scale urban burning on the chemistry of nearby watersheds.The results were alarming: Metal concentrations in affected watersheds increased dramatically — up to 200-fold from pre-fire levels. Concentrations of these metals exceeded Environmental Protection Agency aquatic habitat acute criteria, recommended levels that indicate when a metal has reached the threshold of “toxic” for organisms in the water.For humans, contaminated watersheds can compromise drinking water sources by requiring extensive water treatment or even making some water supplies temporarily unusable.Wildlife, particularly sensitive aquatic species such as fish and amphibians, face immediate threats from these pollutants. The toxic metals can disrupt their reproductive cycles, impair growth and destabilize ecosystems.Silent witnessesIn their larval stages, benthic macroinvertebrates live on the benthos, or bottom, of streams, where they are constantly exposed to the water and sensitive to changes in stream chemistry.Fly-fishing enthusiasts might recognize these creatures as the inspiration for the flies they tie. They are food for other aquatic life, but their presence, diversity and abundance also provide insight into both short-term pollution events and long-term environmental changes that chemical tests alone might miss.Because many species have short life cycles, they allow scientists to observe changes quickly, and different species can provide a nuanced picture of water quality.Just as we were finishing up our analysis of the Camp Fire samples, on Dec. 30, 2021, the Marshall Fire devastated communities in my home state of Colorado, destroying over 1,000 homes in Boulder County’s Coal Creek watershed.For two years following the fire, I worked with a team at the University of Colorado at Boulder to monitor water chemistry, benthic macroinvertebrate populations and algae in Coal Creek. We found that the runoff from fire debris dramatically altered both water quality and the ecological balance at fire-affected sites.Our findings showed persistently elevated toxic metal levels and declines in sensitive aquatic species, indicating potential long-term risks to human activities, such as fishing and irrigation. They also showed that recovery would likely take many years.A toxic cocktail for streamsSimilar to after the Camp Fire, at Boulder County’s urban, fire-affected sites, we observed elevated concentrations of nutrients and metals, including copper, nickel, lead and zinc. By measuring stormwater, we showed that these pollutants were conveyed by concrete drainage systems that quickly funneled the water into the creek. We noted 84 instances where metal concentrations exceeded EPA aquatic life criteria limits in the first year.We also measured significant changes in the types and numbers of benthic macroinvertebrates present. One of the most striking findings was the impact on algae-eating mayflies, which are particularly sensitive to changes in water quality.In the burned urban stretch of the stream, we observed an interesting phenomenon: abundant algae growth but fewer algae-eating mayflies. This suggests that nutrients from burned vegetation are likely stimulating algae growth, while toxic metals from the urban fire debris are hurting sensitive organisms such as mayflies.The algae, while plentiful, may be accumulating toxic metals from the water. When other organisms consume this algae, they could ingest these metals as well. This process, known as bioaccumulation, can lead to increasing concentrations of toxic materials moving up the food chain.What does the evidence mean?It’s important to note that the full impacts of urban wildfires on stream life are still being studied. We can’t yet say definitively whether organism numbers are low because those organisms are dying or if they are experiencing subtler effects, such as reduced reproduction. The decrease in mayfly populations, however, is a concerning indicator of ecosystem stress.For humans, the implications are nuanced. While Coal Creek isn’t a drinking water source, it is used for irrigation and recreation. Metal-contaminated water could accumulate in stream sediments and continue to affect sensitive organisms long term.The creek’s overall health also affects its ability to filter water and support biodiversity.The story told by these streams and their tiny inhabitants is clear: Urban wildfires pose a serious threat to water quality and aquatic life. To protect streams, communities need to reduce fire risk and runoff afterward. Improving urban planning, management of stormwater and watershed monitoring can help safeguard water resources.The health of streams affects the health of communities. Everyone can benefit by listening to the mayflies’ warning.The writer is a researcher in environmental engineering at the University of Colorado at Boulder.This article was produced in collaboration with theconversation.com.

The story told by these streams and their tiny inhabitants is clear: Urban wildfires pose a serious threat to water quality and aquatic life.

A tiny, vibrant world thrives along the rocky bottom of most streams. As sunlight filters through the water, mayfly nymphs, no larger than your fingernail, cling to algae-coated cobbles. Six spindly legs anchor them against the current, while feathery gills wave gently, drawing oxygen from the flowing water.

Subscribe for unlimited access to The Post

You can cancel anytime.

Subscribe

This scene is common in well-maintained creeks and streams that flow through populated areas. But when wildfires sweep through, the toxic materials left behind can devastate this ecosystem.

When you think of urban wildfires, you might picture charred trees and houses. But beneath the surface of nearby streams, fires can also cause a silent upheaval — one that affects populations of creatures that are important indicators of the water’s health.

Wildfires are a natural part of many ecosystems. They rejuvenate landscapes by clearing out dead brush and releasing nutrients from vegetation and soils.

When fires move from nature into neighborhoods, however, they encounter a drastically different set of fuels. Urban conflagrations consume a mix of synthetic and natural materials, including homes, vehicles, electronics and household chemicals. This creates a unique set of problems that can have far-reaching consequences for waterways and the creatures that call them home.

As an environmental engineer, I study how human actions on land affect the chemistry and ecology of surface water systems, including an important group of stream dwellers: benthic macroinvertebrates. These tiny creatures, which include mayflies, stoneflies and caddisflies, are not only food sources for fish and other stream life but also serve as nature’s own water quality monitors.

The author collects samples from a stream. (Adam King)

The Camp Fire’s wake-up call

In November 2018, the Camp Fire devastated the town of Paradise, Calif., destroying over 14,000 homes and other structures. In the aftermath, my colleagues and I examined the effects of large-scale urban burning on the chemistry of nearby watersheds.

The results were alarming: Metal concentrations in affected watersheds increased dramatically — up to 200-fold from pre-fire levels. Concentrations of these metals exceeded Environmental Protection Agency aquatic habitat acute criteria, recommended levels that indicate when a metal has reached the threshold of “toxic” for organisms in the water.

For humans, contaminated watersheds can compromise drinking water sources by requiring extensive water treatment or even making some water supplies temporarily unusable.

Wildlife, particularly sensitive aquatic species such as fish and amphibians, face immediate threats from these pollutants. The toxic metals can disrupt their reproductive cycles, impair growth and destabilize ecosystems.

Silent witnesses

In their larval stages, benthic macroinvertebrates live on the benthos, or bottom, of streams, where they are constantly exposed to the water and sensitive to changes in stream chemistry.

Fly-fishing enthusiasts might recognize these creatures as the inspiration for the flies they tie. They are food for other aquatic life, but their presence, diversity and abundance also provide insight into both short-term pollution events and long-term environmental changes that chemical tests alone might miss.

Because many species have short life cycles, they allow scientists to observe changes quickly, and different species can provide a nuanced picture of water quality.

Just as we were finishing up our analysis of the Camp Fire samples, on Dec. 30, 2021, the Marshall Fire devastated communities in my home state of Colorado, destroying over 1,000 homes in Boulder County’s Coal Creek watershed.

For two years following the fire, I worked with a team at the University of Colorado at Boulder to monitor water chemistry, benthic macroinvertebrate populations and algae in Coal Creek. We found that the runoff from fire debris dramatically altered both water quality and the ecological balance at fire-affected sites.

Our findings showed persistently elevated toxic metal levels and declines in sensitive aquatic species, indicating potential long-term risks to human activities, such as fishing and irrigation. They also showed that recovery would likely take many years.

A toxic cocktail for streams

Similar to after the Camp Fire, at Boulder County’s urban, fire-affected sites, we observed elevated concentrations of nutrients and metals, including copper, nickel, lead and zinc. By measuring stormwater, we showed that these pollutants were conveyed by concrete drainage systems that quickly funneled the water into the creek. We noted 84 instances where metal concentrations exceeded EPA aquatic life criteria limits in the first year.

We also measured significant changes in the types and numbers of benthic macroinvertebrates present. One of the most striking findings was the impact on algae-eating mayflies, which are particularly sensitive to changes in water quality.

In the burned urban stretch of the stream, we observed an interesting phenomenon: abundant algae growth but fewer algae-eating mayflies. This suggests that nutrients from burned vegetation are likely stimulating algae growth, while toxic metals from the urban fire debris are hurting sensitive organisms such as mayflies.

The algae, while plentiful, may be accumulating toxic metals from the water. When other organisms consume this algae, they could ingest these metals as well. This process, known as bioaccumulation, can lead to increasing concentrations of toxic materials moving up the food chain.

What does the evidence mean?

It’s important to note that the full impacts of urban wildfires on stream life are still being studied. We can’t yet say definitively whether organism numbers are low because those organisms are dying or if they are experiencing subtler effects, such as reduced reproduction. The decrease in mayfly populations, however, is a concerning indicator of ecosystem stress.

For humans, the implications are nuanced. While Coal Creek isn’t a drinking water source, it is used for irrigation and recreation. Metal-contaminated water could accumulate in stream sediments and continue to affect sensitive organisms long term.

The creek’s overall health also affects its ability to filter water and support biodiversity.

The story told by these streams and their tiny inhabitants is clear: Urban wildfires pose a serious threat to water quality and aquatic life. To protect streams, communities need to reduce fire risk and runoff afterward. Improving urban planning, management of stormwater and watershed monitoring can help safeguard water resources.

The health of streams affects the health of communities. Everyone can benefit by listening to the mayflies’ warning.

The writer is a researcher in environmental engineering at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

This article was produced in collaboration with theconversation.com.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

California cities pay a lot for water; some agricultural districts get it for free

Even among experts the cost of water supplies is hard to pin down. A new study reveals huge differences in what water suppliers for cities and farms pay for water from rivers and reservoirs in California, Arizona and Nevada.

In summary Even among experts the cost of water supplies is hard to pin down. A new study reveals huge differences in what water suppliers for cities and farms pay for water from rivers and reservoirs in California, Arizona and Nevada. California cities pay far more for water on average than districts that supply farms — with some urban water agencies shelling out more than $2,500 per acre-foot of surface water, and some irrigation districts paying nothing, according to new research.  A report published today by researchers with the UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability and advocates with the Natural Resources Defense Council shines a light on vast disparities in the price of water across California, Arizona and Nevada.  The true price of water is often hidden from consumers. A household bill may reflect suppliers’ costs to build conduits and pump water from reservoirs and rivers to farms and cities. A local district may obtain water from multiple sources at different costs. Even experts have trouble deciphering how much water suppliers pay for the water itself. The research team spent a year scouring state and federal contracts, financial reports and agency records to assemble a dataset of water purchases, transfers and contracts to acquire water from rivers and reservoirs. They compared vastly different water suppliers with different needs and geographies, purchasing water from delivery systems built at different times and paid for under different contracts. Their overarching conclusion: One of the West’s most valuable resources has no consistent valuation – and sometimes costs nothing at all.  Cities pay the highest prices for water. Look up what cities or irrigation districts in California, Nevada and Arizona pay for surface water in our interactive database at calmatters.org “It costs money to move water around,” the report says, “but there is no cost, and no price signal, for the actual water.” That’s a problem, the authors argue, as California and six other states in the Colorado River basin hash out how to distribute the river’s dwindling flows — pressed by federal ultimatums, and dire conditions in the river’s two major reservoirs. The study sounds the alarm that the price of water doesn’t reflect its growing scarcity and disincentivizes conservation. “We’re dealing with a river system and water supply source that is in absolute crisis and is facing massive shortfalls … and yet we’re still treating this as if it’s an abundant, limitless resource that should be free,” said Noah Garrison, environmental science practicum director at UCLA and lead author on the study.  Jeffrey Mount, senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California, applauded the research effort. Though he had not yet reviewed the report, he said complications abound, built into California’s water infrastructure itself and amplified by climate change. Moving, storing and treating water can drive up costs, and are only sometimes captured in the price.  “We’ve got to be careful about pointing our fingers and saying farmers are getting a free ride,” Mount said. Still, he agreed that water is undervalued: “We do not pay the full costs of water — the full social, full economic and the full environmental costs of water.”  Coastal cities pay the most The research team investigated how much suppliers above a certain purchase threshold spend on water from rivers and reservoirs in California, Arizona and Nevada.  They found that California water suppliers pay more than double on average than what Nevada districts pay for water, and seven times more than suppliers in Arizona.  The highest costs span the coast between San Francisco and San Diego, which the researchers attributed to the cost of delivery to these regions and water transfers that drive up the price every time water changes hands.  “In some of those cases it’s almost a geographic penalty for California, that there are larger conveyance or transport and infrastructure needs, depending on where the districts are located,” Garrison said.  Agricultural water districts pay the least In California, according to the authors, cities pay on average 20 times more than water suppliers for farms — about $722 per acre foot, compared to $36.  One acre foot can supply roughly 11 Californians for a year, according to the state’s Department of Water Resources.  Five major agricultural suppliers paid nothing to the federal government for nearly 4 million acre-feet of water, including three in California that receive Colorado River water: the Imperial Irrigation District, the Coachella Valley Water District and the Palo Verde Irrigation District.  Tina Anderholt Shields, water manager for the Imperial Irrigation District, which receives the single largest share of Colorado River water, said the district’s contract with the U.S. government does not require any payment for the water.  Cities, by contrast, received less than 40,000 acre-feet of water for $0. The report notes, however, that the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, a major urban water importer, spends only 25 cents an acre-foot for around 850,000 acre-feet of water from the Colorado River.  Bill Hasencamp, manager of Colorado River resources at Metropolitan, said that the true cost of this water isn’t reflected in the 25-cent fee, because the expense comes from moving it. By the time the Colorado River water gets to the district, he said it costs several hundred dollars. Plus, he added, the district pays for hydropower, which helps cover the costs of the dams storing the water supply. “That enables us to only pay 25 cents an acre foot to the feds on the water side, because we’re paying Hoover Dam costs on the power side.” Federal supplies are the cheapest; transfers drive up costs Much of the difference among water prices across three states comes down to source: those whose supplies come from federally managed rivers, reservoirs, aqueducts and pumps pay far less on average than those receiving water from state managed distribution systems or via water transfers.  Garrison and his team proposed adding a $50 surcharge per acre-foot of cheap federal supplies to help shore up the infrastructure against leaks and losses or pay for large-scale conservation efforts without tapping into taxpayer dollars.  But growers say that would devastate farming in California.  “It’s important to note that the ‘value’ of water is priceless,” said Allison Febbo, General Manager of Westlands Water District, which supplies San Joaquin Valley farms. The report calculates that the district pays less than $40 per acre foot for water from the federal Central Valley Project, though the Westlands rate structure notes another $14 fee to a restoration fund. “The consequences of unaffordable water can be seen throughout our District: fallowed fields, unemployment, decline in food production…” The Imperial Irrigation District’s Shields said that a surcharge would be inconsistent with their contract, difficult to implement, and unworkable for growers.  “It’s not like farmers can just pass it on to their buyers and then have that roll down to the consumer level where it might be ‘manageable,’” Shields said. The most expensive water in California is more than $2,800 an acre-foot The most expensive water in California, Arizona or Nevada flows from the rivers of Northern California, down California’s state-managed system of aqueducts and pumps, to the San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency in Riverside County. Total cost, according to the report: $2,870.21 per acre foot.  Lance Eckhart, the agency’s general manager, said he hadn’t spoken to the study’s authors but that the number sounded plausible. The price tag would make sense, he said, if it included contributing to the costs for building and maintaining the 705-mile long water delivery system, as well as for the electricity needed to pump water over mountains.  Eckhart compared the water conveyance to a railroad, and his water agency to a distant, distant stop. “We’re at the end, so we have the most railroad track to pay for, and also the most energy costs to get it down here,” he said.  Because it took decades for construction of the water delivery system to reach San Gorgonio Pass, the water agency built some of those costs into local property taxes before the water even arrived, rather than into the water bills for the cities and towns they supply. As a result, its mostly municipal customers pay only $399 per acre foot, Eckhart said.  “You can’t build it into rates if you’re not going to see your first gallon for 40 years,” Ekhart said.  The study didn’t interrogate how the wholesale price of imported water translates to residential bills. Water managers point out that cheap supplies like groundwater can help dilute the costs of pricey imported water.  The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, for instance, purchases water imported from the Colorado River and Northern California to fill gaps left by local groundwater stores, supplies from the Owens Valley, and other locally managed sources, said Marty Adams, the utility’s former general manager. (The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power was unable to provide an interview.) Because the amount of water needed can vary from year to year, it’s added as an additional charge on top of the base rate, Adams said. “If you have to pay for purchased water somewhere, when you add all the numbers up, it comes out in that total,” he said.  “The purchased water becomes the wildcard all the time.”

Scientists Thought Parkinson’s Was in Our Genes. It Might Be in the Water

Parkinson’s disease has environmental toxic factors, not just genetic.

Skip to main contentScientists Thought Parkinson’s Was in Our Genes. It Might Be in the WaterNew ideas about chronic illness could revolutionize treatment, if we take the research seriously.Photograph: Rachel JessenThe Big Story is exclusive to subscribers.Start your free trial to access The Big Story and all premium newsletters.—cancel anytime.START FREE TRIALAlready a subscriber? Sign InThe Big Story is exclusive to subscribers. START FREE TRIALword word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word word wordmmMwWLliI0fiflO&1mmMwWLliI0fiflO&1mmMwWLliI0fiflO&1mmMwWLliI0fiflO&1mmMwWLliI0fiflO&1mmMwWLliI0fiflO&1mmMwWLliI0fiflO&1

Drinking water contaminated with Pfas probably increases risk of infant mortality, study finds

Study of 11,000 births in New Hampshire shows residents’ reproductive outcomes near contaminated sitesDrinking water contaminated with Pfas chemicals probably increases the risk of infant mortality and other harm to newborns, a new peer-reviewed study of 11,000 births in New Hampshire finds.The first-of-its-kind University of Arizona research found drinking well water down gradient from a Pfas-contaminated site was tied to an increase in infant mortality of 191%, pre-term birth of 20%, and low-weight birth of 43%. Continue reading...

Drinking water contaminated with Pfas chemicals probably increases the risk of infant mortality and other harm to newborns, a new peer-reviewed study of 11,000 births in New Hampshire finds.The first-of-its-kind University of Arizona research found drinking well water down gradient from a Pfas-contaminated site was tied to an increase in infant mortality of 191%, pre-term birth of 20%, and low-weight birth of 43%.It was also tied to an increase in extremely premature birth and extremely low-weight birth by 168% and 180%, respectively.The findings caught authors by surprise, said Derek Lemoine, a study co-author and economics professor at the University of Arizona who focuses on environmental policymaking and pricing climate risks.“I don’t know if we expected to find effects this big and this detectable, especially given that there isn’t that much infant mortality, and there aren’t that many extremely low weight or pre-term births,” Lemoine said. “But it was there in the data.”The study also weighed the cost of societal harms in drinking contaminated water against up-front cleanup costs, and found it to be much cheaper to address Pfas water pollution.Extrapolating the findings to the entire US population, the authors estimate a nearly $8bn negative annual economic impact just in increased healthcare costs and lost productivity. The cost of complying with current regulations for removing Pfas in drinking water is estimated at about $3.8bn.“We are trying to put numbers on this and that’s important because when you want to clean up and regulate Pfas, there’s a real cost to it,” Lemoine said.Pfas are a class of at least 16,000 compounds often used to help products resist water, stains and heat. They are called “forever chemicals” because they do not naturally break down and accumulate in the environment, and they are linked to serious health problems such as cancer, kidney disease, liver problems, immune disorders and birth defects.Pfas are widely used across the economy, and industrial sites that utilize them in high volume often pollute groundwater. Military bases and airports are among major sources of Pfas pollution because the chemicals are used in firefighting foam. The federal government estimated that about 95 million people across the country drink contaminated water from public or private wells.Previous research has raised concern about the impact of Pfas exposure on fetuses and newborns.Among those are toxicological studies in which researchers examine the chemicals’ impact on lab animals, but that leaves some question about whether humans experience the same harms, Lemoine said.Other studies are correlative and look at the levels of Pfas in umbilical cord blood or in newborns in relation to levels of disease. Lemoine said those findings are not always conclusive, in part because many variables can contribute to reproductive harm.The new natural study is unique because it gets close to “isolating the effect of the Pfas itself, and not anything around it”, Lemoine said.Researchers achieved this by identifying 41 New Hampshire sites contaminated with Pfoa and Pfos, two common Pfas compounds, then using topography data to determine groundwater flow direction. The authors then examined reproductive outcomes among residents down gradient from the sites.Researchers chose New Hampshire because it is the only state where Pfas and reproductive data is available, Lemoine said. Well locations are confidential, so mothers were unaware of whether their water source was down gradient from a Pfas-contaminated site. That created a randomization that allows for causal inference, the authors noted.The study’s methodology is rigorous and unique, and underscores “that Pfas is no joke, and is toxic at very low concentrations”, said Sydney Evans, a senior science analyst with the Environmental Working Group non-profit. The group studies Pfas exposures and advocates for tighter regulations.The study is in part effective because mothers did not know whether they were exposed, which created the randomization, Evans said, but she noted that the state has the information. The findings raise questions about whether the state should be doing a similar analysis and alerting mothers who are at risk, Evans said.Lemoine said the study had some limitations, including that authors don’t know the mothers’ exact exposure levels to Pfas, nor does the research account for other contaminants that may be in the water. But he added that the findings still give a strong picture of the chemicals’ effects.Granular activated carbon or reverse osmosis systems can be used by water treatment plants and consumers at home to remove many kinds of Pfas, and those systems also remove other contaminants.The Biden administration last year put in place limits in drinking water for six types of Pfas, and gave water utilities several years to install systems.The Trump administration is moving to undo the limits for some compounds. That would probably cost the public more in the long run. Utility customers pay the cost of removing Pfas, but the public “also pays the cost of drinking contaminated water, which is bigger”, Lemoine said.

Meet the weird, wonderful creatures that live in Australia’s desert water holes. They might not be there much longer

From water fleas to seed shrimp, Australia’s desert rock holes shelter unique animals found nowhere else. But as the climate warms, their homes are at risk.

The Conversation , CC BY-NDYou might think of Australia’s arid centre as a dry desert landscape devoid of aquatic life. But it’s actually dotted with thousands of rock holes – natural rainwater reservoirs that act as little oases for tiny freshwater animals and plants when they hold water. They aren’t teeming with fish, but are home to all sorts of weird and wonderful invertebrates, important to both First Nations peoples and desert animals. Predatory damselflies patrol the water in search of prey, while alien-like water fleas and seed shrimp float about feeding on algae. Often overlooked in favour of more photogenic creatures, invertebrates make up more than 97% of all animal species, and are immensely important to the environment. Our new research reveals 60 unique species live in Australia’s arid rock holes. We will need more knowledge to protect them in a warming climate. Arid land rock holes play host to a surprisingly diverse range of invertebrates. Author provided, CC BY-ND Overlooked, but extraordinary Invertebrates are animals without backbones. They include many different and beautiful organisms, such as butterflies, beetles, worms and spiders (though perhaps beauty is in the eye of the beholder!). These creatures provide many benefits to Australian ecosystems (and people): pollinating plants, recycling nutrients in the soil, and acting as a food source for other animals. Yet despite their significance, invertebrates are usually forgotten in public discussions about climate change. Freshwater invertebrates in arid Australia are rarely the focus of research, let alone media coverage. This is due to a combination of taxonomic bias, where better-known “charismatic” species are over-represented in scientific studies, and the commonly held misconception that dry deserts are less affected by climate change. Invertebrates in desert oases include insects and crustaceans, often smaller than 5 cm in length. Invertebrates in this picture include three seed shrimp, one pea shrimp, a water flea, a water boatman and a non-biting midge larvae. Author provided, CC BY-ND Oases of life Arid rock-holes are small depressions that have been eroded into rock over time. They completely dry out during certain times of year, making them difficult environments to live in. But when rain fills them up, many animals rely on them for water. When it is hot, water presence is brief, sometimes for only a few days. But during cooler months, they can remain wet for a few months. Eggs that have been lying dormant in the sediments hatch. Other invertebrates (particularly those with wings) seek them out, sometimes across very long distances. In the past, this variability has made ecological research extremely difficult. Our new research explored the biodiversity in seven freshwater rock holes in South Australia’s Gawler Ranges. For the first time, we used environmental DNA techniques on water samples from these pools. Similar to forensic DNA, environmental DNA refers to the traces of DNA left behind by animals in the environment. By sweeping an area for eDNA, we minimise disturbance to species, avoid having to collect the animals themselves, and get a clear snapshot of what is – or was – in an ecosystem. We assume that the capture window for eDNA goes back roughly two weeks. These samples showed that not only were these isolated rock holes full of invertebrate life, but each individual rock hole had a unique combination of animals in it. These include tiny animals such as seed shrimp, water fleas, water boatman and midge larvae. Due to how dry the surrounding landscape is, these oases are often the only habitats where creatures like these can be seen. Culturally significant These arid rock holes are of great cultural significance to several Australian First Nations groups, including the Barngarla, Kokatha and Wirangu peoples. These are the three people and language groups in the Gawler Ranges Aboriginal Corporation, who hold native title in the region and actively manage the rock holes using traditional practices. As reliable sources of freshwater in otherwise very dry landscapes, these locations provided valuable drinking water and resting places to many cultural groups. Some of the managed rock holes hold up to 500 litres of water, but elsewhere they are even deeper. Diverse practices were traditionally developed to actively manage rock holes and reliably locate them. Some of these practices — such as regular cleaning and limiting access by animals — are still maintained today. Freshwater granite rock-holes are still managed using traditional practices in the Gawler Ranges region. Author provided, CC BY-ND Threatened by climate change Last year, Earth reached 1.5°C of warming above pre-industrial levels for the first time. Australia has seen the dramatic consequences of global climate change firsthand: increasingly deadly, costly and devastating bushfires, heatwaves, droughts and floods. Climate change means less frequent and more unpredictable rainfall for Australia. There has been considerable discussion of what this means for Australia’s rivers, lakes and people. But smaller water sources, including rock holes in Australia’s deserts, don’t get much attention. Australia is already seeing a shift: winter rainfall is becoming less reliable, and summer storms are more unpredictable. Water dries out quickly in the summer heat, so wildlife adapted to using rock holes will increasingly have to go without. Storm clouds roll in over the South Australian desert. Author provided, CC BY-ND Drying out? Climate change threatens the precious diversity supported by rock holes. Less rainfall and higher temperatures in southern and central Australia mean we expect they will fill less, dry more quickly, and might be empty during months when they were historically full. This compounds the ongoing environmental change throughout arid Australia. Compared with iconic invasive species such as feral horses in Kosciuszko National Park, invasive species in arid Australia are overlooked. These include feral goats, camels and agricultural animal species that affect water quality. Foreign plants can invade freshwater systems. Deeper understanding Many gaps in our knowledge remain, despite the clear need to protect these unique invertebrates as their homes get drier. Without a deeper understanding of rock-hole biodiversity, governments and land managers are left without the right information to prevent further species loss. Studies like this one are an important first step because they establish a baseline on freshwater biodiversity in desert rock holes. With a greater understanding of the unique animals that live in these remote habitats, we will be better equipped to conserve them. The freshwater damselfly visit granite rock-holes after rain and lay their eggs directly into the water. Author provided, CC BY-ND Brock A. Hedges received funding from Nature Foundation, The Ecological Society of Australia and the Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment. Brock A. Hedges currently receives funding from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.James B. Dorey receives funding from the University of Wollongong. Perry G. Beasley-Hall receives funding from the Australian Biological Resources Study.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.