This is an outdated version published on 2020-02-03. Read the most recent version.

Is groundwater fauna impacted by swine effluent fertigation?

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X42327

Keywords:

Aquatic Life in the Subsurface, Stygofauna, Sedimentary Aquifer.

Abstract

Neste estudo, testamos uma fertirrigação de efluente suíno que afeta a fauna aquática subterrânea do aqüífero livre poroso. Os parâmetros químicos e químicos das águas subterrâneas foram determinados e correlacionados com a fauna que não apresentam fator aquático em áreas fertigadas e não fertigadas com efluentes que não são biodigestores. Como influências da sazonalidade na qualidade da água também foram testadas. Para esse fim, como águas subterrâneas de poços de água e piezômetros preexistentes de propriedade de agricultores, usando o ventilador e a rede de malha de 65 micra para filtrar os organismos. Os resultados físicos e químicos podem mostrar algumas alterações nos parâmetros de qualidade.Registramos doze táxons de invertebrados, sendo Acari e Copepoda os mais prevalentes. A colonização de espécies aquáticas pode ter sido limitada pelo surgimento de organismos exóticos e pela qualidade da água.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Thaynara Davalo Centurião, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, MS

Doutoranda em Programa de Tecnologias Ambientais (PGTA) na Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS). Mestre em Recursos Hídricos e Saneamento (PGTA / UFMS). Possui graduação em licenciatura em Ciências Biológicas pela Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (2017)

William Marcos da Silva, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, MS

Possui graduação em Licenciatura em Ciências Biológicas pela Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (1993), mestrado em Ciências da Engenharia Ambiental pela Universidade de São Paulo (1998) e doutorado em Ecologia e Recursos Naturais pela Universidade Federal de São Carlos (2003). Atualmente é professor adjunto e pesquisador da Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, campus Pantanal, Corumbá, MS e professor de Pós-Graduação em Tecnologias Ambientais e Pós-Graduação em Biologia Animal, ambos na UFMS Campo Grande. 

Sandra Garcia Gabas, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, MS

Possui graduação em Geologia pelo Instituto de Geociências - USP (1990), mestrado em Engenharia de Minas pela Escola Politécnica - USP (1999) e doutorado em Engenharia Civil pela Escola Politécnica - USP (2005). Atualmente é professora associada da Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul

References

BORK J, BERKHOFF SE, BORK S, HAHN HJ. Using subsurface metazoan fauna to indicate groundwater-surface water interactions in the Nakdong River floodplain, South Korea. Hydrogeol. J. 2009;17:61-75.

BRANCELJ A, BOONYANUSITH C, WATIROYRAM S, SANOAMUANG L. The groundwater-dwelling fauna of Southeast Asia. J. Limnol. 2013;72(2):327-344.

BRANCELJ A, ZIBRAT U, JAMNIK B. Differences between groundwater fauna in shallow and in deep intergranular aquifers as an indication of different characteristics of habitats and hydraulic connections. J. Limnol. 2016;75(2).

BRASIL. Conselho Nacional de Meio Ambiente. Resolução CONAMA n° 396, de 3 de abril de 2008. Diário Oficial [da] República Federativa do Brasil, Brasília, DF, 2008.

BRASIL. MS – Ministério da Saúde -. Portaria de Consolidação nº 5, de 28 de setembro de 2017. Dispõe sobre os procedimentos de controle e de vigilância da qualidade da água para consumo humano e seu padrão de potabilidade. Brasília-DF, 2017.

COMPANIA DE PESQUISA E RECURSOS MINERAIS. Serviço Geológico do Brasil (CPRM). Mapa geológico do estado de Mato Grosso do Sul. (Programa Geologia do Brasil). Escala 1:1.000.000. Brasília: CPRM, 2006.

DANIELOPOL DL, GRIEBLER C, GUNATILAKA A, NOTENBOOM J. Present state and future prospects for groundwater ecosystems. Environ. Conserv. J. 2003;30(2):104-130.

DANIELOPOL DL. Groundwater Fauna Associated with Riverine Aquifers. J N AM BENTHOL SOC. 1989;8(1):18-35.

DI LORENZO, T, CIFONI M, FIASCA B et al. Ecological risk assessment of pesticide mixtures in the alluvial aquifers of central Italy: Toward more realistic scenarios for risk mitigation. Sci Total Environ. 2018;644:161-172.

FERRARO AA, GABAS SG, LASTORIA G. Origem de metais pesados em aquífero livre de São Gabriel do Oeste, Mato Grosso do Sul. Geociências. 2015;34(4):801-815.

GALASSI DMP, HUYS R, REID JW. Diversity, ecology and evolution of groundwater copepods. Freshw. Biol. 2009;54(4):691-708.

GALLÃO JE, BICHUETTE ME. Brazilian obligatory subterranean fauna and threats to the hypogean environment. ZooKeys. 2018;746:1-23.

GIBERT J, DANIELOPOL DL, STANFORD JA. Groundwater Ecology. Academic Press, INC.; 1994. 571 p.

GRIEBLER C, AVRAMOV M. Groundwater ecosystem services: a review. Freshw. Sci. 2014;34(1):355-367.

GRIEBLER C, MALARD F, LEFÉBURE T. Current developments in groundwater ecology—from biodiversity to ecosystem function and services. Curr opin biotechnol. 2014;27:159-167.

HAHN HJ. The GW-Fauna-Index: A first approach to a quantitative ecological assessment of groundwater habitats. Limnologica. 2006;36:119-137.

HAHN HJ. A proposal for an extended typology of groundwater habitats. Hydrogeol. J. 2009;17(1): 77-81.

HUMPHREYS WF. Hydrogeology and groundwater ecology: Does each inform the other?. Hydrogeol. J. 2009;17(1):5-21.

KORBEL K, CHARITON A, STEPHENSON S, et al. Wells provide a distorted view of life in the aquifer: implications for sampling, monitoring and assessment of groundwater ecosystems. Sci. rep. 2017;7:1-13.

KORBEL KL, HANCOCK PJ, SEROV P, LIM RP, HOSE GC. Groundwater ecosystems vary with land use across a mixed agricultural landscape. J. Environ. Qual. 2013;42(2):380-390.

LOPEZ, M. L. D., MAGBANUA, F. S., MAMARIL, A. C., et al. Variations in microcrustacean (Crustacea: Cladocera, Copepoda) assemblages from selected groundwater-dependent ecosystems in the greater Luzon and Mindoro Island faunal regions (Philippines): insights to tropical groundwater ecology. INLAND WATERS. 2017;7(4):428-439.

MARMONIER P, MAAZOUZI C, BARAN N et al. Ecology-based evaluation of groundwater ecosystems under intensive agriculture: A combination of community analysis and sentinel exposure. Sci Total Environ. 2018;613(1):1353-1366.

PAHL CBC, LASTORIA G, GABAS SG. Microbial contamination of groundwater in a swine fertigation area. RBRH. 2018;42(23):1-12.

SCHMIDT SI, HAHN HJ. What is groundwater and what does this mean to fauna? - An opinion. Limnologica. 2012;42(1):1-6.

Secretaria de Estado de Meio Ambiente, do Planejamento, da Ciência e Tecnologia e Instituto de Meio Ambiente de Mato Grosso do Sul (SEMAC). Plano Estadual de Recursos Hídricos de Mato Grosso do Sul, Editora UEMS, 196 p, 2010.

SOUZA AA, LASTORIA G, GABAS S. et al. Avaliação da água subterrânea nos aquíferos cenozoico e guarani em São Gabriel do Oeste-MS: subsídios à gestão integrada. Ciênc. Nat. 2014;36(2):169-179.

TOMLINSON M, BOULTON AJ, HANCOCK P. et al. Deliberate omission or unfortunate oversight: Should stygofaunal surveys be included in routine groundwater monitoring programs?. Hydrogeol. J. 2007;15(7):1317-1320.

Downloads

Published

2020-02-03

Versions

How to Cite

Centurião, T. D., Silva, W. M. da, & Gabas, S. G. (2020). Is groundwater fauna impacted by swine effluent fertigation?. Ciência E Natura, 42, e34. https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X42327

Issue

Vol. 42 (2020): 40 YEARS - Anniversary Edition

Section

Environment

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.