Sewage Treatment Offers Biodiversity Boost in U.K. River

A Thames tributary has been recovering since regulations changed in 1991 

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Rivers act as Earth's arteries and veins, providing sustenance and sweeping away waste to keep terrestrial habitats in shape. By that measure, England is unhealthy: a startling 86 percent of its rivers do not meet water-quality standards, posing a risk to wildlife and human health.

A new study offers hope. Invertebrate biodiversity in one Thames River tributary has increased in the past 30 years, thanks to an adjustment in wastewater treatment, scientists at the U.K.'s Center for Ecology & Hydrology have found. “It's starting to reach levels one might expect to find in a river without any wastewater,” says environmental scientist Andrew Johnson, lead author on the analysis, which appeared in August in Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry.

Invertebrates such as crustaceans, insects and worms are key players in aquatic ecosystems. They shape their environment by digging into riverbeds and filtering water, and they are both predators and prey. These animals also respond quickly to environmental changes, indicating an ecosystem's health.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The researchers analyzed data collected by the U.K. Environment Agency between 1977 and 2017 for a 12-kilometer stretch of the River Ray downstream from a large wastewater treatment plant in the southwestern town of Swindon. They found a steady increase in the variety and numbers of invertebrates since June 1991.

That timing coincides with the 1991 European Union Urban Wastewater Directive, which pushed treatment plants to switch from filtration to an activated sludge process that uses microbes to break down contaminants. This dramatically cut the organic matter and toxic ammonia going into rivers—and so invertebrate biodiversity slowly improved, the team concluded. “You could liken it to being given a diet of cheeseburgers for 20 years and then switching to a healthy diet,” Johnson says. “Recovery is not instant.”

John Sumpter, an ecotoxicologist at Brunel University London, says this increase most likely boosted diversity among larger creatures, too, and that these results probably apply in other places. Still, published studies showing such improvements are rare. “A big problem is that very few countries have the long-term data sets to conduct the analyses required,” he says.

The new work suggests that “urban rivers in the U.K. are recovering from the gross pollution problems of the industrial era,” says Steve Ormerod, an ecologist at Cardiff University in Wales. But full restoration will require more work and tougher regulations, he adds, noting the growing problem of agricultural pollution: “The basic story of British rivers is one of urban improvement but rural decline.”

Yet Johnson thinks the River Ray results show a possible path forward. “And maybe,” he says, “wildlife is more robust than we'd thought.”

Prachi Patel is a freelance journalist based in Pittsburgh. She writes about energy, materials science, nanotechnology, biotechnology and computing.

More by Prachi Patel
Scientific American Magazine Vol 321 Issue 6This article was published with the title “Biome Boost” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 321 No. 6 (), p. 18
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1219-18b

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe