New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

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

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe