2014
DOI: 10.2478/s11756-014-0448-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Response of macroinvertebrate communities to anthropogenic pressures in Tajan River (Iran)

Abstract: The Tajan River was investigated for one year in seven stations, analyzing the relationships between physical properties, water chemistry and aquatic macroinvertebrates. Biotic and diversity indices were compared with canonical unconstrained (CA) and constrained (CCA) ordination to test different methods able to estimate river ecology status. An upstream-downstream gradient was emphasized, in presence of anthropogenic stressors, coming from trout farms, paper factory, agriculture, urbanization, river regulatio… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The FBI values did differ significantly among the reference and tributary stations with downstream stations (P \ 0.05). Based on our results and other studies, the FBI index seems suitable for the assessment of the quality of rivers in Iran (Lydy et al 2000;Shokri et al 2014). The water at the upstream stations of the Shahrood River was reasonably clean, and a suitable habitat for many sensitive macroinvertebrates such as stoneflies and caddisflies (Cole 2002;Storey and Quinn 2011).…”
Section: Biotic Indicesmentioning
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The FBI values did differ significantly among the reference and tributary stations with downstream stations (P \ 0.05). Based on our results and other studies, the FBI index seems suitable for the assessment of the quality of rivers in Iran (Lydy et al 2000;Shokri et al 2014). The water at the upstream stations of the Shahrood River was reasonably clean, and a suitable habitat for many sensitive macroinvertebrates such as stoneflies and caddisflies (Cole 2002;Storey and Quinn 2011).…”
Section: Biotic Indicesmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…The use of biotic communities for monitoring aquatic environments, especially water quality, has several widely known advantages over physicochemical monitoring (Hering et al 2006;Sharifinia et al 2012a;Findik 2013;Tan et al 2014b). In running waters, where changes in hydrology are rapid and variable, biological monitoring has proved to be useful due to its integrating nature (Atazadeh et al 2007;Miserendino 2009;Varnosfaderany et al 2010;Smucker and Vis 2011;Namin et al 2013a, b;Vidal-Abarca et al 2013;Shokri et al 2014;Nazarhaghighi et al 2014;Tan et al 2014b). Such methodological tools for bioassessment have improved significantly in recent years (Marzin et al 2012;Pace et al 2012;Chang et al 2014;Karaouzas et al 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The spatial and temporal variability of water salinity (Akin et al, 2005;Basset et al, 2013), the high nutrient supply and the strong gradients of both nutrient concentrations (Pérez-Ruzafa et al, 2005;Basset et al, 2013) and dissolved oxygen (Hull et al, 2008;Cozzoli et al, 2013;Shokri et al, 2014) are the main "natural" sources of disturbance. Potential coloniser species, being of freshwater and marine origin (Barnes, 1989;Ciotti et al, 2015), need to cope with these sources of disturbance and particularly with water salinity variability and the related osmoregulation costs, which drive species' standard metabolic rates.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The relatively high variation of water quality parameters related to various types of land use are characteristics that can be used to inform or predict aspects of water quality in rivers that lack data. In this study, physicochemical parameters were significantly different among the stations as the measure in observing water quality that was related to the presence of macroinvertebrates (Mophin-Kani K and Murugesan 2014; Fierro et al 2015;Shokri et al 2014). Water temperature in the upstream of the watershed was low due to the closure of the water body by the forest compared to the middle and downstream part which was already opened, especially at the edge of the river (Rezende et al 2016).…”
Section: Physicochemical Parameters Of the River Water Qualitymentioning
confidence: 80%