1
|
Grajal-Puche A, Driver EM, Propper CR. Review: Abandoned mines as a resource or liability for wildlife. THE SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT 2024; 921:171017. [PMID: 38369145 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.171017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2023] [Revised: 02/02/2024] [Accepted: 02/14/2024] [Indexed: 02/20/2024]
Abstract
Abandoned Mine Lands (AMLs) are areas where previous mineral extraction or processing has occurred. Hundreds of thousands of AMLs exist within the United States. Contaminated runoff from AMLs can negatively affect the physiology and ecology of surrounding terrestrial and aquatic habitats and species and can be detrimental to human health. As a response, several U.S. federal and state agencies have launched programs to assess health risks associated with AMLs. In some cases, however, AMLs may be beneficial to specific wildlife taxa. There is a relative paucity of studies investigating the physiological and ecological impacts of AMLs on wildlife. We conducted a systematic review examining published scientific articles that assessed the negative and positive impacts of AMLs across invertebrate and vertebrate taxa. We also offer suggestions on evaluating AMLs to develop effective mitigation strategies that reduce their negative tole on human and wildlife communities. Peer-reviewed publications were screened across WebofScience, PubMed and Google Scholar databases. Abandoned mine lands were generally detrimental to wildlife, with adverse effects ranging from bioaccumulation of heavy metals to decreased ecological fitness. Conversely, AMLs were an overall benefit to imperiled bat populations and could serve as tools for conservation. Studies were unevenly distributed across different wildlife taxa groups, echoing the necessity for additional taxonomically diverse research. We suggest that standardized wildlife survey methods be used to assess how different species utilize AMLs. Federal and state agencies can use these surveys to establish effective remediation plans for individual AML sites and minimize the risks to both wildlife and humans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alejandro Grajal-Puche
- Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86004, United States of America
| | - Erin M Driver
- Biodesign Center for Environmental Health Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States of America
| | - Catherine R Propper
- Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86004, United States of America.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mammola S, Meierhofer MB, Borges PA, Colado R, Culver DC, Deharveng L, Delić T, Di Lorenzo T, Dražina T, Ferreira RL, Fiasca B, Fišer C, Galassi DMP, Garzoli L, Gerovasileiou V, Griebler C, Halse S, Howarth FG, Isaia M, Johnson JS, Komerički A, Martínez A, Milano F, Moldovan OT, Nanni V, Nicolosi G, Niemiller ML, Pallarés S, Pavlek M, Piano E, Pipan T, Sanchez‐Fernandez D, Santangeli A, Schmidt SI, Wynne JJ, Zagmajster M, Zakšek V, Cardoso P. Towards evidence-based conservation of subterranean ecosystems. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 2022; 97:1476-1510. [PMID: 35315207 PMCID: PMC9545027 DOI: 10.1111/brv.12851] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2021] [Revised: 02/22/2022] [Accepted: 03/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Subterranean ecosystems are among the most widespread environments on Earth, yet we still have poor knowledge of their biodiversity. To raise awareness of subterranean ecosystems, the essential services they provide, and their unique conservation challenges, 2021 and 2022 were designated International Years of Caves and Karst. As these ecosystems have traditionally been overlooked in global conservation agendas and multilateral agreements, a quantitative assessment of solution-based approaches to safeguard subterranean biota and associated habitats is timely. This assessment allows researchers and practitioners to understand the progress made and research needs in subterranean ecology and management. We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature focused on subterranean ecosystems globally (terrestrial, freshwater, and saltwater systems), to quantify the available evidence-base for the effectiveness of conservation interventions. We selected 708 publications from the years 1964 to 2021 that discussed, recommended, or implemented 1,954 conservation interventions in subterranean ecosystems. We noted a steep increase in the number of studies from the 2000s while, surprisingly, the proportion of studies quantifying the impact of conservation interventions has steadily and significantly decreased in recent years. The effectiveness of 31% of conservation interventions has been tested statistically. We further highlight that 64% of the reported research occurred in the Palearctic and Nearctic biogeographic regions. Assessments of the effectiveness of conservation interventions were heavily biased towards indirect measures (monitoring and risk assessment), a limited sample of organisms (mostly arthropods and bats), and more accessible systems (terrestrial caves). Our results indicate that most conservation science in the field of subterranean biology does not apply a rigorous quantitative approach, resulting in sparse evidence for the effectiveness of interventions. This raises the important question of how to make conservation efforts more feasible to implement, cost-effective, and long-lasting. Although there is no single remedy, we propose a suite of potential solutions to focus our efforts better towards increasing statistical testing and stress the importance of standardising study reporting to facilitate meta-analytical exercises. We also provide a database summarising the available literature, which will help to build quantitative knowledge about interventions likely to yield the greatest impacts depending upon the subterranean species and habitats of interest. We view this as a starting point to shift away from the widespread tendency of recommending conservation interventions based on anecdotal and expert-based information rather than scientific evidence, without quantitatively testing their effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefano Mammola
- Laboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe)Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of HelsinkiPohjoinen Rautatiekatu 13Helsinki00100Finland
- Molecular Ecology Group (dark‐MEG)Water Research Institute (IRSA), National Research Council (CNR)Largo Tonolli, 50Verbania‐Pallanza28922Italy
| | - Melissa B. Meierhofer
- BatLab Finland, Finnish Museum of Natural History Luomus (LUOMUS)University of HelsinkiPohjoinen Rautatiekatu 13Helsinki00100Finland
| | - Paulo A.V. Borges
- cE3c—Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Changes / Azorean Biodiversity Group / CHANGE – Global Change and Sustainability InstituteUniversity of Azores, Faculty of Agrarian Sciences and Environment (FCAA), Rua Capitão João d'ÀvilaPico da Urze, 9700‐042 Angra do HeroísmoAzoresPortugal
| | - Raquel Colado
- Departament of Ecology and HidrologyUniversity of MurciaMurcia30100Spain
| | - David C. Culver
- Department of Environmental ScienceAmerican University4400 Massachusetts Avenue, N.WWashingtonDC20016U.S.A.
| | - Louis Deharveng
- Institut de Systématique, Evolution, Biodiversité (ISYEB), CNRS UMR 7205, MNHN, UPMC, EPHEMuseum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Sorbonne UniversitéParisFrance
| | - Teo Delić
- SubBio Lab, Department of Biology, Biotechnical FacultyUniversity of LjubljanaJamnikarjeva 101Ljubljana1000Slovenia
| | - Tiziana Di Lorenzo
- Research Institute on Terrestrial Ecosystems (IRET‐CNR), National Research CouncilVia Madonna del Piano 10, 50019 Sesto FiorentinoFlorenceItaly
| | - Tvrtko Dražina
- Division of Zoology, Department of BiologyFaculty of Science, University of ZagrebRooseveltov Trg 6Zagreb10000Croatia
- Croatian Biospeleological SocietyRooseveltov Trg 6Zagreb10000Croatia
| | - Rodrigo L. Ferreira
- Center of Studies in Subterranean Biology, Biology Department, Federal University of LavrasCampus universitário s/n, Aquenta SolLavrasMG37200‐900Brazil
| | - Barbara Fiasca
- Department of Life, Health and Environmental SciencesUniversity of L'AquilaVia Vetoio 1, CoppitoL'Aquila67100Italy
| | - Cene Fišer
- SubBio Lab, Department of Biology, Biotechnical FacultyUniversity of LjubljanaJamnikarjeva 101Ljubljana1000Slovenia
| | - Diana M. P. Galassi
- Department of Life, Health and Environmental SciencesUniversity of L'AquilaVia Vetoio 1, CoppitoL'Aquila67100Italy
| | - Laura Garzoli
- Molecular Ecology Group (dark‐MEG)Water Research Institute (IRSA), National Research Council (CNR)Largo Tonolli, 50Verbania‐Pallanza28922Italy
| | - Vasilis Gerovasileiou
- Department of Environment, Faculty of EnvironmentIonian University, M. Minotou‐Giannopoulou strPanagoulaZakynthos29100Greece
- Hellenic Centre for Marine Research (HCMR), Institute of Marine BiologyBiotechnology and Aquaculture (IMBBC)Thalassocosmos, GournesCrete71500Greece
| | - Christian Griebler
- Department of Functional and Evolutionary Ecology, Division of LimnologyUniversity of ViennaDjerassiplatz 1Vienna1030Austria
| | - Stuart Halse
- Bennelongia Environmental Consultants5 Bishop StreetJolimontWA6014Australia
| | | | - Marco Isaia
- Department of Life Sciences and Systems BiologyUniversity of TurinVia Accademia Albertina, 13TorinoI‐10123Italy
| | - Joseph S. Johnson
- Department of Biological SciencesOhio University57 Oxbow TrailAthensOH45701U.S.A.
| | - Ana Komerički
- Croatian Biospeleological SocietyRooseveltov Trg 6Zagreb10000Croatia
| | - Alejandro Martínez
- Molecular Ecology Group (dark‐MEG)Water Research Institute (IRSA), National Research Council (CNR)Largo Tonolli, 50Verbania‐Pallanza28922Italy
| | - Filippo Milano
- Department of Life Sciences and Systems BiologyUniversity of TurinVia Accademia Albertina, 13TorinoI‐10123Italy
| | - Oana T. Moldovan
- Emil Racovita Institute of SpeleologyClinicilor 5Cluj‐Napoca400006Romania
- Romanian Institute of Science and TechnologySaturn 24‐26Cluj‐Napoca400504Romania
| | - Veronica Nanni
- Department of Life Sciences and Systems BiologyUniversity of TurinVia Accademia Albertina, 13TorinoI‐10123Italy
| | - Giuseppe Nicolosi
- Department of Life Sciences and Systems BiologyUniversity of TurinVia Accademia Albertina, 13TorinoI‐10123Italy
| | - Matthew L. Niemiller
- Department of Biological SciencesThe University of Alabama in Huntsville301 Sparkman Drive NWHuntsvilleAL35899U.S.A.
| | - Susana Pallarés
- Departamento de Biogeografía y Cambio GlobalMuseo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, CSICCalle de José Gutiérrez Abascal 2Madrid28006Spain
| | - Martina Pavlek
- Croatian Biospeleological SocietyRooseveltov Trg 6Zagreb10000Croatia
- Ruđer Bošković InstituteBijenička cesta 54Zagreb10000Croatia
| | - Elena Piano
- Department of Life Sciences and Systems BiologyUniversity of TurinVia Accademia Albertina, 13TorinoI‐10123Italy
| | - Tanja Pipan
- ZRC SAZUKarst Research InstituteNovi trg 2Ljubljana1000Slovenia
- UNESCO Chair on Karst EducationUniversity of Nova GoricaGlavni trg 8Vipava5271Slovenia
| | | | - Andrea Santangeli
- Research Centre for Ecological Change, Organismal and Evolutionary Biology Research ProgrammeUniversity of HelsinkiViikinkaari 1Helsinki00014Finland
| | - Susanne I. Schmidt
- Institute of Hydrobiology, Biology Centre CASNa Sádkách 702/7České Budějovice370 05Czech Republic
- Department of Lake ResearchHelmholtz Centre for Environmental ResearchBrückstraße 3aMagdeburg39114Germany
| | - J. Judson Wynne
- Department of Biological SciencesCenter for Adaptable Western Landscapes, Box 5640, Northern Arizona UniversityFlagstaffAZ86011U.S.A.
| | - Maja Zagmajster
- SubBio Lab, Department of Biology, Biotechnical FacultyUniversity of LjubljanaJamnikarjeva 101Ljubljana1000Slovenia
| | - Valerija Zakšek
- SubBio Lab, Department of Biology, Biotechnical FacultyUniversity of LjubljanaJamnikarjeva 101Ljubljana1000Slovenia
| | - Pedro Cardoso
- Laboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe)Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of HelsinkiPohjoinen Rautatiekatu 13Helsinki00100Finland
- cE3c—Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Changes / Azorean Biodiversity Group / CHANGE – Global Change and Sustainability InstituteUniversity of Azores, Faculty of Agrarian Sciences and Environment (FCAA), Rua Capitão João d'ÀvilaPico da Urze, 9700‐042 Angra do HeroísmoAzoresPortugal
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Cryan PM, Gorresen PM, Straw BR, Thao S(S, DeGeorge E. Influencing Activity of Bats by Dimly Lighting Wind Turbine Surfaces with Ultraviolet Light. Animals (Basel) 2021; 12:ani12010009. [PMID: 35011115 PMCID: PMC8744972 DOI: 10.3390/ani12010009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2021] [Revised: 12/03/2021] [Accepted: 12/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Bats often fly near wind turbines. The fatalities associated with this behavior continue to be an issue for wind energy development and wildlife conservation. We tested an experimental method intended to reduce bat fatalities at the wind turbines. We assumed that bats navigate over long distances at night by dim-light vision and might be dissuaded from approaching artificially lit structures. For over a year, we experimentally lit wind turbines at night with dim, flickering ultraviolet (UV) light while measuring the presence and activity of bats, birds, and insects with thermal-imaging cameras. We detected no statistical differences in the activity of the bats, insects, or birds at a test turbine when lit with UV light compared with that of unlit nights. Additional experiments to test this or other possible bat-deterrence methods may benefit from considering subtle measures of animal response that can provide useful information on the possible behavioral effects of fatality-reduction experiments. Abstract Wind energy producers need deployable devices for wind turbines that prevent bat fatalities. Based on the speculation that bats approach turbines after visually mistaking them for trees, we tested a potential light-based deterrence method. It is likely that the affected bats see ultraviolet (UV) light at low intensities. Here, we present the results of a multi-month experiment to cast dim, flickering UV light across wind turbine surfaces at night. Our objectives were to refine and test a practical system for dimly UV-illuminating turbines while testing whether the experimental UV treatment influenced the activity of bats, birds, and insects. We mounted upward-facing UV light arrays on turbines and used thermal-imaging cameras to quantify the presence and activity of night-flying animals. The results demonstrated that the turbines can be lit to the highest reaches of the blades with “invisible” UV light, and the animal responses to such experimental treatment can be concurrently monitored. The UV treatment did not significantly change nighttime bat, insect, or bird activity at the wind turbine. Our findings show how observing flying animals with thermal cameras at night can help test emerging technologies intended to variably affect their behaviors around wind turbines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul M. Cryan
- U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Fort Collins Science Center, Fort Collins, CO 80526, USA;
- Correspondence:
| | - Paulo M. Gorresen
- Hawaii Cooperative Studies Unit, University of Hawaii at Hilo, Hilo, HI 96720, USA;
- USGS Pacific Island Ecosystems Science Center, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, Hilo, HI 96718, USA
| | - Bethany R. Straw
- U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Fort Collins Science Center, Fort Collins, CO 80526, USA;
| | - Syhoune (Simon) Thao
- U.S. Department of Energy, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, National Wind Technology Center, Boulder, CO 80007, USA; (S.T.); (E.D.)
| | - Elise DeGeorge
- U.S. Department of Energy, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, National Wind Technology Center, Boulder, CO 80007, USA; (S.T.); (E.D.)
| |
Collapse
|