Historical series (1997-2012) of the oxygenation conditions Capivari (RS) river and its influences on the protection of aquatic life of the water resource
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X13109Keywords:
Influences, Dissolved oxygen, Degradations, Aquatic life.Abstract
http://dx.doi.org/10.5902/2179460X13109
The aim of this study was to analyze the conditions of oxygenation of the river Capivari the year 1997 to 2012 and their influences on the aquatic life of that. Methodologies of qualitative and quantitative nature allied to the preferred search properties of documents, were applied in addition to ratings derived from the author himself, as conditions for aquatic life in lotic water bodies. Sampling was conducted on the water quality of the county Capivary South, the Fundação Estadual de Proteção Ambiental, a fixed depth of 0.2 m monitoring station. Through this study it was concluded that 92.2 % of aquatic life Capivari River has been preserved as a function of dissolved oxygen during the sixteen years engaged in the study. Degradations of aquatic life were found on the body of water in the summer of the years 2001, 2005 and 2012 and fall in 2002 and 2007. Low levels of dissolved oxygen found in these periods are explained, mainly, by the increase of water temperature, high rates of degradation of organic matter and the presence of processes involving nitrification. As can be concluded that from 1997 to 2012, the river Capivari nearby municipality Capivary do Sul, showed in general good quality of oxygenation and preservation of aquatic life due to the oxygenation parameter.Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
