Download Document

IERM Overview

Goals:
1.
2.

Development of an integrated, whole-system
model for ecological response to water
level/flow scenarios
Blend ecological research from LOSL study
with existing data and knowledge base for
system
Five main benefits to incorporating data
collection into the IERM





Scale integration
Process representation
Extending available data
Spatial extrapolation
Evaluation of competing responses
Benefit #1: Scale Integration

IERM will provide means for integrating a
range of spatial and temporal scales

Includes H&H inputs as well as ecosystem
interactions

Example:
Fish Response
(seasonal)
Algal Response
(weekly)
H&H Inputs
(weekly)
Plant Community
Response (long-term)
Muskrat Response
(annual)
Benefit #2: Process Representation

Representation of processes that explain
community/population dynamics

Process-based model provides predictive
capability

Connects indicator to stressors

Potentially connects indicator species to
entire community
Process Representation – Sport Fish
Example
Water Level
& Flow
Nutrient
Sources
Phytoplankton
Species or Guild
Temperature
Habitat Quantity
& Quality
YOY Abundance
•Growth
•Predation
•Natural
Mortality
(Graduation)
Zooplankton
Juvenile Abundance
•Growth
Stocking
•Predation
•Natural
Planktivorous
Fish
Mortality
(Graduation)
Adult Abundance
•Growth
•Natural
Mortality
•Reproduction
Harvest
Benefit #3: Extending Available Data

Model can account for time lag in causeeffect relationships

Measured fish guild response depends on
initial community abundance/structure
prior to field experiment

Consider feedbacks between ecosystem
components (e.g. muskrat
cattails)
Benefit #4: Spatial Extrapolation

IERM provides avenue for extending
results for a localized area to other parts
of the system

Need to include all important governing
factors to make extrapolation work

Examples:

Extend results for 32 Lake Ontario wetlands to
other wetland areas

Extend dabbling duck nesting success for Lake
St. Pierre to Lake Ontario
Benefit #5: Evaluate Competing Responses

Data collection efforts address responses
for individual species

IERM provides “big picture” evaluation of
all species responses

Example:

Regulation “Scenario X” impacts:

Wetland diversity

Northern pike population

Dabbling duck population

Muskrat population
Evaluate Competing Responses - Example
Regulation
Lake Ontario
WL Variations
St. Lawrence
Flow Variations
Cattail
Abundance
Cattail
Abundance
Wetland
Plant Diversity
Wetland
Plant Diversity
Northern Pike
Habitat Quality
Northern Pike
Habitat Quality
Muskrat
Habitat Quality
Muskrat
Habitat Quality