Academy of Natural Sciences of Drexel University

About: Academy of Natural Sciences of Drexel University is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Genus. The organization has 627 authors who have published 1462 publications receiving 65768 citations. The organization is also known as: Academy of Natural Sciences & Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.

Amazonia Through Time: Andean Uplift, Climate Change, Landscape Evolution, and Biodiversity

Abstract: The Amazonian rainforest is arguably the most species-rich terrestrial ecosystem in the world, yet the timing of the origin and evolutionary causes of this diversity are a matter of debate. We review the geologic and phylogenetic evidence from Amazonia and compare it with uplift records from the Andes. This uplift and its effect on regional climate fundamentally changed the Amazonian landscape by reconfiguring drainage patterns and creating a vast influx of sediments into the basin. On this “Andean” substrate, a region-wide edaphic mosaic developed that became extremely rich in species, particularly in Western Amazonia. We show that Andean uplift was crucial for the evolution of Amazonian landscapes and ecosystems, and that current biodiversity patterns are rooted deep in the pre-Quaternary.

Synthesizing U.S. river restoration efforts

Abstract: The authors of this Policy Forum developed a comprehensive database of >37,000 river restoration projects across the United States. Such projects have increased exponentially over the past decade with more than a billion dollars spent annually since 1990. Most are intended to enhance water quality, manage riparian zones, improve in-stream habitat, allow fish passage, and stabilize stream banks. Only 10% of project records document any form of project monitoring, and little if any of this information is either appropriate or available for assessing the ecological effectiveness of restoration activities.

The new higher level classification of eukaryotes with emphasis on the taxonomy of protists

Abstract: This revision of the classification of unicellular eukaryotes updates that of Levine et al. (1980) for the protozoa and expands it to include other protists. Whereas the previous revision was primarily to incorporate the results of ultrastructural studies, this revision incorporates results from both ultrastructural research since 1980 and molecular phylogenetic studies. We propose a scheme that is based on nameless ranked systematics. The vocabulary of the taxonomy is updated, particularly to clarify the naming of groups that have been repositioned. We recognize six clusters of eukaryotes that may represent the basic groupings similar to traditional ''kingdoms.'' The multicellular lineages emerged from within monophyletic protist lineages: animals and fungi from Opisthokonta, plants from Archaeplastida, and brown algae from Stramenopiles.

Denitrification in freshwater and coastal marine ecosystems: Ecological and geochemical significance

Abstract: Denitrification occurs in essentially all river, lake, and coastal marine ecosystems that have been studied. In general, the range of denitrification rates measured in coastal marine sediments is greater than that measured in lake or river sediments. In various estuarine and coastal marine sediments, rates commonly range between 50 and 250 µmol N m−2 h−1, with extremes from 0 to 1,067. Rates of denitrification in lake sediments measured at near-ambient conditions range from 2 to 171 µmol N m−2 h−1. Denitrification rates in river and stream sediments range from 0 to 345 µmol N m−2 h−1. The higher rates are from systems that receive substantial amounts of anthropogenic nutrient input. In lakes, denitrification also occurs in low oxygen hypolimnetic waters, where rates generally range from 0.2 to 1.9 µmol N liter−1 d−1. In lakes where denitrification rates in both the water and sediments have been measured, denitrification is greater in the sediments. The major source of nitrate for denitrification in most river, lake, and coastal marine sediments underlying an aerobic water column is nitrate produced in the sediments, not nitrate diffusing into the sediments from the overlying water. During the mineralization of organic matter in sediments, a major portion of the mineralized nitrogen is lost from the ecosystem via denitrification. In freshwater sediments, denitrification appears to remove a larger percentage of the mineralized nitrogen. N2 fluxes accounted for 76–100% of the sediment-water nitrogen flux in rivers and lakes, but only 15–70% in estuarine and coastal marine sediments. Benthic N2O fluxes were always small compared to N, fluxes. The loss of nitrogen via denitrification exceeds the input of nitrogen via N2 fixation in almost all river, lake, and coastal marine ecosystems in which both processes have been measured. Denitrification is also important relative to other inputs of fixed N in both freshwater and coastal marine ecosystems. In the two rivers where both denitrification measurements and N input data were available, denitrification removed an amount of nitrogen equivalent to 7 and 35% of the external nitrogen loading. In six lakes and six estuaries where data are available, denitrification is estimated to remove an amount of nitrogen equivalent to between 1 and 36% of the input to the lakes and between 20 and 50% of the input to the estuaries.

Standards for ecologically successful river restoration

Abstract: Summary 1. Increasingly, river managers are turning from hard engineering solutions to ecologically based restoration activities in order to improve degraded waterways. River restoration projects aim to maintain or increase ecosystem goods and services while protecting downstream and coastal ecosystems. There is growing interest in applying river restoration techniques to solve environmental problems, yet little agreement exists on what constitutes a successful river restoration effort. 2. We propose five criteria for measuring success, with emphasis on an ecological perspective. First, the design of an ecological river restoration project should be based on a specified guiding image of a more dynamic, healthy river that could exist at the site. Secondly, the river’s ecological condition must be measurably improved. Thirdly, the river system must be more self-sustaining and resilient to external perturbations so that only minimal follow-up maintenance is needed. Fourthly, during the construction phase, no lasting harm should be inflicted on the ecosystem. Fifthly, both pre- and postassessment must be completed and data made publicly available. 3. Determining if these five criteria have been met for a particular project requires development of an assessment protocol. We suggest standards of evaluation for each of the five criteria and provide examples of suitable indicators. 4. Synthesis and applications . Billions of dollars are currently spent restoring streams and rivers, yet to date there are no agreed upon standards for what constitutes ecologically beneficial stream and river restoration. We propose five criteria that must be met for a river restoration project to be considered ecologically successful. It is critical that the broad restoration community, including funding agencies, practitioners and citizen restoration groups, adopt criteria for defining and assessing ecological success in restoration. Standards are needed because progress in the science and practice of river restoration has been hampered by the lack of agreed upon criteria for judging ecological success. Without well-accepted criteria that are ultimately supported by funding and implementing agencies, there is little incentive for practitioners to assess and report restoration outcomes. Improving methods and weighing the ecological benefits of various restoration approaches require organized national-level reporting systems.