All Title Author
Keywords Abstract

Water  2013 

Impacts of Hydrologic Change on Sandbar Nesting Availability for Riverine Turtles in Eastern Minnesota, USA

DOI: 10.3390/w5031243

Keywords: hydrologic alteration, Apalone mutica, Glyptemys insculpta, nesting, sandbar, Minnesota

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib


There have been significant increases in stream flow in many rivers of the Upper Midwestern United States since 1980. Increased summer flows may negatively impact ecological processes, including aquatic organisms’ life cycles. The smooth softshell ( Apalone mutica) and wood turtle ( Glyptemys insculpta) are threatened by alteration of stream flow regime and other changes to river ecosystems in the Upper Midwest. We hypothesized that prolonged duration of high summer flows would reduce time available for nesting. We assessed hydrologic change using the Indicators of Hydrologic Alteration program and stream gauge data, characterized physical properties of sandbars, surveyed turtle nesting sites and assessed historical channel change using aerial photos in GIS on five Upper Midwest rivers. A river stage-sandbar area relationship was developed to determine the effect of prolonged summer flow duration on turtle nesting opportunity for the 1940–2009 time period. Suitable water levels have declined since 1980 in the agricultural watersheds of southern Minnesota likely delaying hatching and reducing survival, particularly for aquatic turtles such as A. mutica. In contrast to the agricultural watersheds, there was no significant change in the northern forested rivers’ stream flow and sandbar availability during the nesting season. Management to reduce summer stream flow in agricultural watersheds and protection of known nest sites could benefit threatened aquatic turtle populations.


[1]  Allan, J.D. Stream Ecology: Structure and Function of Running Waters; Chapman & Hall: London, UK, 1995.
[2]  Richter, B.; Baumgartner, J.; Powell, J.; Braun, D. A method for assessing hydrologic alteration within ecosystems. Conserv. Biol. 1996, 10, 1163–1174.
[3]  Hauer, C.; Unfer, G.; Holzmann, H.; Schmutz, S.; Habersack, H. The impact of discharge change on physical instream habitats and its response to river morphology. Clim. Chang. 2013, 116, 827–850, doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0507-4.
[4]  Bodie, J.R. Stream and riparian management for freshwater turtles. J. Environ. Manag. 2001, 62, 443–455, doi:10.1006/jema.2001.0454.
[5]  Ricciardi, A.; Rasmussen, J.B. Extinction rates of North American freshwater fauna. Conserv. Biol. 1999, 13, 1220–1222, doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1999.98380.x.
[6]  Lenhart, C.F.; Petersen, H.; Nieber, J. Watershed response to climate change in the upper Midwest: The importance of low and mean flow increases for agricultural watershed management. Watershed Sci. Bull. 2011, Spring, 25–31.
[7]  Ashmore, P.; Church, M. The Impact of Climate Change on Rivers and River Processes in Canada. Bulletin 555; Geological Survey of Canada: Ottawa, Canada, 2001.
[8]  Knighton, D. Fluvial Forms & Processes: A New Perspective; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1998.
[9]  Schottler, S.P.; Ulrich, J.; Belmont, P.; Moore, R.; Lauer, W.J.; Engstrom, D.R.; Almendinger, J.E. Twentieth century agricultural drainage creates more erosive rivers. Hydrol. Process. 2013, 2013, doi:10.1002/hyp.9738.
[10]  Oldfield, B.; Moriarty, J. Amphibians and Reptiles Native to Minnesota; University of Minnesota Press: Minneapolis, MN, USA, 1994; p. 237.
[11]  Ernst, C.H.; Barbour, R.W.; Lovich, J.E. Turtles of the United States and Canada; Smithsonian Institution Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1994.
[12]  Pope, C.H. Turtles of the United States and Canada; Alfred A. Knopf Publishers: New York, NY, USA, 1946; p. 343.
[13]  Naber, J.R.; Majeski, M.J. Wood Turtle Surveys-Final Report; Unpublished Report Submitted to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources: St. Paul, MN, USA, 2010.
[14]  Ewert, M.A. Assessment of the Current Distribution and Abundance of the Wood Turtle (Clemmys insculpta) in Minnesota and along the St. Croix Scenic Waterway in Wisconsin; First Year Report Submitted to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources: St. Paul, MN, USA, 1984.
[15]  Ewert, M.A. Assessment of the Current Distribution and Abundance of the Wood Turtle (Clemmys insculpta) in Minnesota and along the St. Croix Scenic Waterway in Wisconsin; Second Year Report Submitted to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources: St. Paul, MN, USA, 1985.
[16]  Walde, A.D.; Bider, J.R.; Masse, D.; Saumure, R.A.; Titman, R.D. Nesting ecology and hatching success of the wood turtle, Glyptemys insculpta, in Que’bec. Herpetol. Conserv. Biol. 2007, 2, 49–60.
[17]  Mullins, M.A.; Janzen, F.J. Phenotypic effects of thermal means and variances on smooth softshell turtle (A. mutica) embryos and hatchlings. Herpetologica 2006, 62, 27–36, doi:10.1655/04-02.1.
[18]  Lenhart, C.; Verry, E.; Brooks, K.; Magner, J. Adjustment of prairie pothole streams to land-use, drainage and climate change and consequences for turbidity impairment. River Res. Appl. 2012, 28, 1609–1619, doi:10.1002/rra.1549.
[19]  Lenhart, C.; Titov, M.; Ulrich, J.; Nieber, J.; Suppes, B. The role of hydrologic alteration and riparian vegetation dynamics in channel evolution along the lower Minnesota River. Trans. ASABE 2013, 56, 549–561.
[20]  Cruz, R. Assessing the Health of Streams in Agricultural Landscapes: How Land Management Changes Impact Water Quality; Cruse, R., Ed.; Council on Agricultural Science and Technology (CAST): Ames, IA, USA, 2012.
[21]  Bodie, J.R.; Semlistsch, R.D. Spatial and temporal use of floodplain habitats by lentic and lotic species of aquatic turtles. Oecologia 2000, 122, 138–146, doi:10.1007/PL00008830.
[22]  Spradling, T.A.; Tamplin, J.W.; Dow, S.S.; Meyer, K.J. Conservation genetics of a peripherally isolated population of the wood turtle (Glyptemys insculpta) in Iowa. Conserv. Genet. 2010, 11, 1667–1677, doi:10.1007/s10592-010-0059-y.
[23]  Anderson, R.V.; Gutierrex, M.L.; Romano, M.A. Turtle habitat use in a reach of the upper Mississippi River. J. Freshw. Ecol. 2002, 17, 171–177, doi:10.1080/02705060.2002.9663884.


comments powered by Disqus