EFFECTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS ON THE RICHNESS AND COMPOSITION OF AQUATIC MACROPHYTES IN URBAN STREAMS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X17220Keywords:
Urbanização, Conservação, Levantamento florísticoAbstract
http://dx.doi.org/10.5902/2179460X17220
The aquatic macrophytes are plants that contribute to aquatic ecosystem with its distribution and abundance determined, among others factors, by water level and velocity, eutrophication, anthropogenic pressure and luminosity. We describe the richness and composition of species aquatic macrophytes in two small basins of Dourados city, Mato Grosso do Sul State, Brazil and their relationship with environmental characteristics. The floristic survey was performed in 16 sites, the aquatic-paludal macrophytes found were recorded as well as some physical and chemical variables and degradation level of streams through Rapid Assessment Protocol-PAR. A Non-Metric Multidimensional Scaling Analysis (NMDS) was performed to investigate differences in species composition and richness among the sampled sites. We recorded 79 plant species, distributed in 33 families. The richest family was Cyperaceae. We observed that PAR was the main descriptor of species richness and composition of aquatic macrophytes in urban streams analyzed, altered stream stretches present higher species richness and life forms, such as Salvinia biloba, Utricularia gibba, Elanthium bolivianun, Rotala Mexicana. On the other hand, impacted portions presented lower richness, being represented by amphibian species of the families Cyperaceae and Poaceae, such as Cyperus alternifolius, Urochloa arrecta and Pennisetum purpureum.
Downloads
References
ALBA-TERCEDOR, J. Macroinvertebrados acuáticos y calidad de las aguas de los ríos. In: IV Simposio del Agua en Andalucia (SIAGA), Almeria, p. 203-213, 1996.
BARBOUR, M. T. et al. Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish. 2. ed. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Office Of Water (EPA 841-B-99-002). 1999.
AMARAL, M. C. E. et al. Guia de campo para plantas aquáticas e palustres do Estado de São Paulo. Ribeirão Preto: Holos, 2008. 452 p.
BOVE, C. P. et al. Hidrófitas fanerogâmicas de ecossistemas aquáticos temporários da planície costeira do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica, v. 17, n.1, p.119-135, 2003.
CALLISTO, M. et al. Aplicação de um protocolo de avaliação da diversidade de habitats em atividades de ensino e pesquisa (MG-RJ). Acta Limnologica Brasiliensia, v. 14, n. 1, p.91-98, 2002.
CAMARGO, A. F. M.; SCHIAVETTI, A.; CETRA, M. Efeito da Mineração de areia sobre a estrutura da comunidade de macrófitas aquáticas em um ecossistema lótico do litoral sul paulista. Revista Brasileira de Ecologia, v. 1, n. 2, p.54-59, 1997.
CARVALHO, S. L. EUTROFIZAÇÃO ARTIFICIAL: Um Problema em Rios, Lagos e Represas. 2004. Disponível em: <http://www.agr.feis.unesp.br/ctl28082004.php>. Acesso em: 27 maio 2013.
CASATTI, L. et al. Stream fish, water and habitat quality in a pasture dominated basin, southeastern Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Biology, v. 66, n. 2b, p.681-696, 2006a.
CASATTI, L.; LANGEANI, F.; FERREIRA, C. P. Effects of physical habitat degradation on the stream fish assemblage structure in a pasture region. Environmental management, v. 38, n. 6, p. 974-982, 2006b.
CERVI, A. C. et al. Macrófitas aquáticas do Município de General Carneiro, Paraná, Brasil. Biota Neotropica, v. 9, n. 3, p.214-222, 2009.
DUFRÊNE, M.; LEGENDRE, P. Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecological Monographs, v. 67, n. 3, p.345-366, 1997.
EFRON, B. Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife. Annals of Statistics, v. 7, n. 1, p.1-26, 1979.
ESTEVES, F. A. Fundamentos de limnologia. 2. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Interciência, 1998. 602 p.
ESTEVES, F. A. & CAMARGO, A. F. M. 1986. Sobre o papel das macrófitas aquáticas na estocagem e clicagem de nutrientes. Acta Limnologica Brasiliensia, v. 1, n. 1, p.273-298, 1986.
FERREIRA, F. A. et al. Macrophytes in the upper Paraná river floodplain: checklist and comparison with other large South American wetlands. Revista de Biologia Tropical, v. 59, n. 2, p.541-556, 2011.
GECHEVA, G.; YURUKOVA, L.; CHESHMEDJIEV, S. Patterns of aquatic macrophyte species composition and distribution in Bulgarian rivers. Turkish Journal of Botany, v. 37, p.99-110, 2013.
GOETGHEBEUR, P. Cyperaceae. In: KUBITZKI, K. et al. Flowering Plants - Monocotyledons: The Families and Genera of Vascular Plants Volume 4. Springer - Verlag, 1998. p. 141-190.
GOULART, M.; CALLISTO, M. Bioindicadores de qualidade de água como ferramenta em estudos de impacto ambiental. Revista da FAPAM, v. 2, n. 1, p.153-164, 2003.
HANNAFORD, M. J.; BARBOUR, M. T.; RESH, V. H. Training reduces observer variability in visual-based assessments of stream habitat. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, v. 16, n. 4, p.853-860, 1997.
HENRY-SILVA, G. G.; MOURA, R. S. T.; DANTAS, L. L. O. Richness and distribution of aquatic macrophytes in Brazilian semi-arid aquatic ecosystems. Acta Limnologica Brasiliensia, v. 22, n. 2, p.147-156, 2010.
HRIVNÁK, R.; OŤAHEL’OVÁ, H.; JAROLÍMEK, I. Diversity of aquatic macrophytes in relation to environmental factors in the Slatina river (Slovakia). Biologia, v. 61, n. 4, p.413-419, 2006.
IRGANG, B. E., PEDRALLI, G. & WAECHTER, J. L. Macrófitos aquáticos da Estação Ecológica do Taim, Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil. Roessléria, v. 6, n. 1, p.395-404, 1984.
JUNK, W. J.; PIEDADE, M. T. F. Plant life in the floodplain with special reference to herbaceous plants. In: JUNK, W. J. The central Amazon floodplain: ecology of a pulsing system Volume 126. Springer - Verlag, 1997. p. 147-185.
KISSMANN, K. G.; GROTH, D. Plantas infestantes e nocivas. 2.ed. São Paulo: BASF, 1997. Tomo I. 825 p.
KITA, K. K.; SOUZA, M. C. Levantamento florístico e fitofisionomia da lagoa Figueira e seu entorno, planície alagável do alto rio Paraná, Porto Rico, Estado do Paraná, Brasil. Acta Scientiarum. Biological Sciences, v. 25, n. 1, p. 145-155, 2003.
LACOUL, P.; FREEDMAN, B. Environmental influences on aquatic plants in freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Review,v. 14, n. 2: p. 89-136, 2006.
LORENZI, H. Plantas daninhas do Brasil: terrestres, aquáticas, parasitas, tóxicas e medicinais. 4. ed. Nova Odessa: Instituto Plantarum, 2008. 640 p.
MCGEOCH, M.A.; CHOWN, S.L. Scaling up the value of bioindicators. Trends in Ecology Evolution, v. 13, n. 2, p.46-47, 1998.
MCGEOCH, M. A.; RENSBURG, B. J. V.; BOTES, B. The verification and application of bioindicators: a case study of dung beetles in a savanna ecosystem. Journal of Applied Ecology, v. 39, n. 4, p.661-672, 2002.
MORMUL, R. P. et al. Aquatic macrophytes in the large, sub-tropical Itaipu Reservoir, Brazil. Revista de Biologia Tropical, v. 58, n. 4, p.1437-1452, 2010.
PEDRALLI, G.; GONÇALVES, A. P. S. Levantamento florístico e aspectos da sucessão em duas lagoas na região Cárstica de Minas Gerais, Brasil. Daphne, v. 7, n. 3, p.17-25, 1997.
PEDRALLI, G.. Macrófitas aquáticas como bioindicadoras da qualidade da água: alternativa para usos múltiplos de reservatórios. In: THOMAZ, S. M.;BINI, L. M. (eds.) Ecologia e Manejo de macrófitas aquáticas. Maringá: Universidade Estadual de Maringá. 2003. p. 171-188.
POTT, V. J.; POTT, A. Plantas aquáticas do Pantanal. Corumbá: Embrapa/CPAP. 2000. 404 p.
R DEVELOPMENT CORE TEAM. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. [2.2.0]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. 2011.
RIZIZINI, C. T. Tratado de fitogeografia do Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Âmbito Cultural. 1997. 747p.
SCREMIN-DIAS, E. H. et al. Nos jardins submersos da Bodoquena. Campo Grande: Editora UFMS. 1999. 160 p.
SCULTHORPE, C. D. The biology of aquatic vascular plants. London: Edward Arnold Ltd. 1967. 610 p.
SILVA, J. R. V.; MARTINS, D. Controle químico de Typha subulata em dois estádios de desenvolvimento. Planta Daninha, v. 22, n. 3, p.437-443, 2004.
THOMAZ, S. M. et al. Ocorrência e distribuição espacial de macrófitas aquáticas em reservatórios. In: RODRIGUES, L. et al. Biocenoses em reservatórios: padrões espaciais e temporais. São Carlos: Rima. 2005. p. 281-292.
THOMAZ, S. M.; BINI, L. M. 2003. Ecologia e manejo de macrófitas aquáticas. Maringá: Universidade Estadual de Maringá. 2003. 41 p.
USA. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life. Division of Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment, (Surface Water Section). Columbus I-III 120. 1987.
WETZEL, R. G. Limnologia. 2. ed. Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. 1993. 1129 p.
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.
