Biodiversity in Hudson River shore zones: influence of shoreline type and physical structure

• Published in: Aquatic sciences Vol. 74; no. 3; pp. 597 - 610
• Main Authors: Strayer, David L., Findlay, Stuart E. G., Miller, Daniel, Malcom, Heather M., Fischer, David T., Coote, Thomas
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Basel SP Birkhäuser Verlag Basel 01.07.2012; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Aquatic ecology; Aquatic plants; Biodiversity; Biomedical and Life Sciences; Bulkheads; Community composition; Ecology; Estuaries; Freshwater; Freshwater & Marine Ecology; Life Sciences; Marine & Freshwater Sciences; Oceanography; Plant species; Research Article; Riprap; Rivers; Shorelines; Shores; Waterways; Hudson River; USA, New Jersey, Hudson R; Shorelines; Littoral zone; Macroinvertebrates; Vegetation; Fish; Riparian zone; Estuary
• ISSN: 1015-1621; 1420-9055
• DOI: 10.1007/s00027-012-0252-9

The shore zones of the Hudson River, like those of many developed waterways, are highly varied, containing a mix of seminatural and highly engineered shores. Our goal was to document the biodiversity supported by different kinds of shore zones in the Hudson. We chose six common types of shore zones, three of them “natural” (sand, unconsolidated rock, and bedrock), and three of them engineered (riprap, cribbing, and bulkheads). We measured selected physical characteristics (shore zone width, exposure, substrate roughness and grain size, shoreline complexity) of three examples of each of these shore types, and also sampled communities of terrestrial plants, fishes, and aquatic and terrestrial invertebrates. Community composition of most taxa differed across shore types, and frequently differed between wide, sheltered shores and narrow, exposed shores. Alien plant species were especially well represented along engineered shores. Nevertheless, a great deal of variation in biological communities was not explained by our six-class categorization of shore zones or the physical variables that we measured. No single shore type supported the highest values of all kinds of biodiversity, but engineered shore zones (especially cribbing and bulkheads) tended to have less desirable biodiversity characteristics than “natural” shore zones.