Global Change and River Ecosystems—Implications for Structure, Function and Ecosystem Services 2010
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-0608-8_12
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparing fish assemblages and trophic ecology of permanent and intermittent reaches in a Mediterranean stream

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

4
42
2

Year Published

2012
2012
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 70 publications
4
42
2
Order By: Relevance
“…This suggests that fishes were not just consuming what they encountered first, but actively selecting or partitioning resources. Mas‐Martı´ et al () observed in permanently flowing Mediterranean streams that the two fish species present (Mediterranean barbel Barbus meridionalis Risso 1827 and the cyprinid Squalius laietanus Doadrio, Kottelat & de Sostoa 2007) would ingest the most available food resources while, similar to this study, in the intermittent stream the two species appeared to select against the most available resources. These data are rarely recorded and few studies are available for comparison.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…This suggests that fishes were not just consuming what they encountered first, but actively selecting or partitioning resources. Mas‐Martı´ et al () observed in permanently flowing Mediterranean streams that the two fish species present (Mediterranean barbel Barbus meridionalis Risso 1827 and the cyprinid Squalius laietanus Doadrio, Kottelat & de Sostoa 2007) would ingest the most available food resources while, similar to this study, in the intermittent stream the two species appeared to select against the most available resources. These data are rarely recorded and few studies are available for comparison.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…Within isolated pools, there were differences in structure and availability of macroinvertebrate resources. Other studies have shown that macroinvertebrate densities decreased by 40–60% in isolated pools, which is lower than that found in this study [73–87%; Towns (); Mas‐Martı´ et al ()]. The families that accounted for differences in macroinvertebrate density between sections were those most prominent in the connected pools and included Caenidae, Chironomidae, Heptageniidae, Hydropsychidae, Leptophlebiidae, Polycentropodidae and Psephenidae.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 78%
See 3 more Smart Citations