Study

The potential of Integrated Constructed Wetlands (ICWs) to enhance macroinvertebrate diversity in agricultural landscapes

  • Published source details Jurado G.B., Johnson J., Feeley H., Harrington R. & Kelly-Quinn M. (2010) The potential of Integrated Constructed Wetlands (ICWs) to enhance macroinvertebrate diversity in agricultural landscapes. Wetlands, 30, 393-404

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Create scrapes and pools

Action Link
Farmland Conservation
  1. Create scrapes and pools

    A replicated site comparison study in 2006 of five recently developed Integrated Constructed Wetlands in a catchment in Ireland (Jurado et al. 2010) found that the total number of macroinvertebrate taxa and beetle (Coleoptera) taxa did not differ between Integrated Constructed Wetlands and natural ponds, although communities did differ. A total of 134 taxa were found in Integrated Constructed Wetland ponds, 116 of which were in the last pond, compared to 129 taxa in natural ponds. Although taxon richness and beetle richness did not differ between natural and Integrated Constructed Wetland ponds, overall communities and beetle communities differed significantly. There were 151 taxa with the two pond types, of which 92 taxa (61%) were common to both types of ponds, 35 (23%) were found only in natural ponds and 24 (16%) only in Integrated Constructed Wetland ponds. There was no significant difference between the numbers of taxa in Integrated Constructed Wetlands and the river sites. Of 169 total taxa, 53 (31%) were found in both sites, 64 (38%) in only Integrated Constructed Wetlands and 52 (31%) only at river sites. Five Integrated Constructed Wetlands (consisting of interconnected ponds) and five natural ponds within pasture were sampled in March-April and July-August 2006. Sampling involved three, 3-minute multi-habitat net samples (mesh: 1 mm) and 10 horizontal activity traps in each of the different pond habitats (ponds >10 cm deep). Nine sites on Annestown River, upstream and/or downstream of discharges from the final Integrated Constructed Wetlands were also sampled. Two, 3-minute multi-habitat kick samples were collected (mesh: 0.5 mm) in each of the different river habitats (mesohabitats).

Output references

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust