No abstract

No abstract

Aim: Traditionally, South American aquatic insects have been divided into cold and warm adapted forms. Cold-adapted forms inhabit freshwater systems from higher latitudes, or higher altitudes even around the Equator. Warm-adapted groups are defined as those found in lower latitudes and altitudes. This work aims to answer the questions: Are mayfly assemblages geographically segregated according to geographical (latitude) and topographical (altitude) surrogates of temperature? If so, where is this transition located?Location: South America. Methods:We compiled a data set about the relative incidence of 52 mayfly genera in 326 sampled communities. They span from 0 to 4,320 m and from 47.77°S to 5.74°N latitude. By virtue of the compositional nature of the data set, we applied the statistical procedures behind the Aitchison compositional data analysis. We delimited groups of assemblages based on their Aitchison distances and projected the data points onto a biplot obtained through Principal Component Analysis adjusted to compositions (Aitchison PCA). Results: A strong correspondence among biological and geographical information was detected, with mayfly assemblages clearly segregated in space. Andesiops and Meridialaris are typical cold-adapted forms; Baetodes, Leptohyphes and Thraulodes represent the warm group. Thermal groups can be separated by a curved line of altitude in function of latitude expressed in terms of a superellipse arc. Main conclusions: The classical ecological bipartition of mayflies into warm and cold freshwater groups is formalized quantitatively. The dividing line between warm and cold assemblages levels off at high altitudes (c. 3,300 m) around the Equator and falls to sea level at southern latitudes. The community bipartition line is useful for tracking global change through records of altitudinal displacement below and above of the warm/cold line of involved ecological groups.

Freshwater ecosystems are the most threatened ecosystems worldwide. Argentinianprotected areas have been established mainly to protect vertebrates and plants in terrestrial ecosystems. In order to create a comprehensive biodiverse conservation plan, it is crucial to integrate both aquatic and terrestrial systems and to include macroinvertebrates. Here, we address this topic by proposing priority areas of conservation including invertebrates, aquatic ecosystems, and their connectivity and land uses.Location: Northwest of Argentina. We modeled the ecological niches of different taxa of macroinvertebrates such as Coleoptera, Ephemeroptera, Hemiptera, Megaloptera, Lepidoptera, Odonata, Plecoptera, Trichoptera, Acari, and Mollusca. Based on these models, we analyzed the contribution of currently established protected areas in the conservation of the aquatic biodiversity and we propose a spatial prioritization taking into account possible conflict regarding different land uses. Our analysis units were the real watersheds, to which were added longitudinal connectivity up and down the rivers. A total of 132 species were modeled in the priority area analyses. The analysis 1 showed that only an insignificant percentage of the macroinvertebrates distribution is within the protected areas in the North West of Argentina. The analyses 2 and 3 recovered similar values of protection for the macroinvertebrate species. The upper part of Bermejo, Salí-Dulce, San Francisco, and the Upper part of Juramento basins were identified as priority areas of conservation. The aquatic ecosystems need special protection and 10% or even as much as 17% of land conservation is insufficient for species of macroinvertebrates. In turn the protected areas need to combine the aquatic and terrestrial systems and need to include macroinvertebrates as a key group to sustain the biodiversity. In many cases, the land uses are in conflict with the conservation of biodiversity; however, it is possible to apply the connectivity of the watersheds and create multiple-use modules.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract