Conditional effects of aquatic insects of small tributaries on mainstream assemblages: Position within drainage network matters

Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences

Volumn 71, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 1-9

  Milesi, Silvia Vendruscolo ^a   Melo, Adriano Sanches ^b  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO GRANDE DO SUL   (Brazil)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF GOIÁS   (Brazil)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; CONFLUENCE; DRAINAGE NETWORK; FAUNA; MACROINVERTEBRATE; MICROHABITAT; STREAM; SUBSTRATE; TRIBUTARY;

EID: 84891683902     PISSN: 0706652X     EISSN: 12057533     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/cjfas-2013-0092     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Almeida-Neto, M.P., Guimarães, P., Guimarães, P.R., Jr., Loyola, R.D., and Ulrich, W. 2008. A consistent metric for nestedness analysis in ecological systems: reconciling concept and measurement. Oikos, 117(8): 1227-1239. doi:10.1111/j.0030-1299.2008.16644.x.
2. Anderson, M.J. 2001. A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Aust. Ecol. 26(1): 32-46. doi:10.1111/j.1442-9993.2001.01070.pp.x.
3. Baselga, A. 2010. Partitioning the turnover and nestedness components of beta diversity. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 19(1): 134-143. doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2009. 00490.x.
4. Benda, L., Poff, N.L., Miller, D., Dunne, T., Reeves, G., Pess, G., and Pollock, M. 2004. The network dynamics hypothesis: how channel networks structure riverine habitats. Bioscience, 54 (5): 413-427. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054 [0413:TNDHHC]2.0.CO;2.
5. Britain, J.E., and Eikeland, T.J. 1988. Invertebrate drift-a review. Hydrobiologia, 166(1): 77-93. doi:10.1007/BF00017485.
6. Brown, B.L., and Swan, C.M. 2010. Dendritic network structure constrains metacommunity properties in riverine ecosystems. J. Anim. Ecol. 79(3): 571-580. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2010.01668.x. PMID:20180874.
7. Brown, B.L., Swan, C.M., Auerbach, D.A., Campbell-Grant, E.H., Hitt, N.P., Maloney, K.O., and Patrick, C. 2011. Metacommunity theory as a multispecies, multiscale framework for studying the influence of river network structure on riverine communities and ecosystems. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc. 30(1): 310-327. doi:10.1899/10-129.1.
8. Buckup, L., Bueno, A.A.P., Bond-Buckup, G., Casagrande, M., and Majolo, F. 2007. The benthic macroinvertebrate fauna of highland streams in southern Brazil: composition, diversity and structure. Rev. Bras. Zool. 24(2): 294-301. doi: 10.1590/S0101-81752007000200005.
9. Campbell, R.E., and McIntosh, A.R. 2013. Do isolation and local habitat jointly limit the structure of stream invertebrate assemblages? Freshw. Biol. 58(1): 128-141. doi:10.1111/fwb.12045.
10. Carrara, F., Altermatt, F., Rodriguez-Iturbe, I., and Rinaldo, A. 2012. Dendritic connectivity controls biodiversity patterns in experimental metacommunities. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109(15): 5761-5766. doi:10.1073/pnas. 1119651109. PMID:22460788.
11. Cellot, B. 1996. Influence of side-arms on aquatic macroinvertebrate drift in the main channel of a large river. Freshw. Biol. 35(1): 149-164. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2427.1996.00490.x.
12. Costa, S., Ide, S., and Simonka, C.E. 2006. Insetos imaturos. Metamorfose e identificação. Holos, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
13. Downes, B.J., Hindelland, J.S., and Bond, N.R. 2000. What's in a site? Variation in lotic macroinvertebrate density and diversity in a spatially replicated experiment. Aust. Ecol. 25(2): 128-139. doi:10.1046/j.1442-9993.2000.01019.x.
14. Ero{double acute accent}s, T., Schmera, D., and Schick, R.S. 2011. Network thinking in riverscape conservation-A graph-based approach. Biol. Conserv. 144(1): 184-192. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.08.013.
15. Fagan, W.F. 2002. Connectivity, fragmentation, and extinction risk in dendritic metapopulations. Ecology, 83(12): 3243-3249. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083 [3243:CFAERI]2.0.CO;2.
16. Fernandes, C.C., Podosand, J., and Lundberg, J.G. 2004. Amazonian ecology: Tributaries enhance the diversity of electric fishes. Science, 305(5692): 1960-1962. doi:10.1126/science.1101240. PMID:15448270.
17. Fernández, H.R., and Domínguez, E. 2001. Guía para la determinación de los artrópodos bentónicos Sudamericano. Ed. Univ. de Tucumán. Tucumán, Argentina.
18. Finn, D.S., Bonada, N., Múrria, C., and Hughes, J.M. 2011. Small but mighty: headwaters are vital to stream network biodiversity at two levels of organization. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc. 30(4): 963-980. doi:10.1899/11-012.1.
19. Gotelli, N.J. 2000. Null model analysis of species co-occurrence patterns. Ecology, 81(9): 2606-2621. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[2606:NMAOSC]2.0.CO;2.
20. Gotelli, N.L., and Colwell, R.K. 2001. Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecol. Lett. 4(4): 379-391. doi:10.1046/j.1461-0248.2001.00230.x.
21. Gotelli, N.J., and Taylor, C.M. 1999. Testing metapopulation models with streamfish assemblages. Evol. Ecol. Res. 1: 835-845.
22. Grant, E.H.C., Loweand, W.H., and Fagan, W.F. 2007. Living in the branches: population dynamics and ecological processes in dendritic networks. Ecol. Lett. 10(2): 165-175. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.01007.x. PMID:17257104.
23. Grant, E.H.C., Greenand, L.E., and Lowe, W.H. 2009. Salamander occupancy in headwater stream networks. Freshw. Biol. 54(6): 1370-1378. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02166.x.
24. Heino, J., Louhiand, P., and Muotka, T. 2004. Identifying the scales of variability in stream macroinvertebrates abundance, functional composition and assemblage structure. Freshw. Biol. 49(9): 1230-1239. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427. 2004.01259.x.
25. Heino, J., Grönroos, M., Ilmonen, J., Karhu, T., Niva, M., and Paasivirta, L. 2013. Environmental heterogeneity and β diversity of stream macroinvertebrate communities at intermediate spatial scales. Freshw. Sci. 32(1): 142-154. doi: 10.1899/12-083.1.
26. Hepp, L.U., Landeiro, V.L., and Melo, A.S. 2012. Experimental assessment of the effects of environmental factors and longitudinal position on alpha and beta diversities of aquatic insects in a Neotropical stream. Int. Rev. Hydrobiol. 97(2): 157-167. doi:10.1002/iroh.201111405.
27. Jonsson, B.G. 2001. A null model for randomization tests of nestedness in species assemblages. Oecologia, 127: 309-313. doi:10.1007/s004420000601.
28. Kiffney, P.M., Greene, C.M., Hall, J.E., and Davies, J.R. 2006. Tributary streams create spatial discontinuities in habitat, biological productivity, and diversity in mainstem rivers. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 63(11): 2518-2530. doi:10.1139/ f06-138.
29. Knispel, S., and Castella, E. 2003. Disruption of a longitudinal pattern in environmental factors and benthic fauna by a glacial tributary. Freshw. Biol. 48(4): 604-618. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2427.2003.01030.x.
30. Legendre, P., and Legendre, L. 1998. Numerical ecology. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
31. Lowe, W.H., Likens, G.E., and Power, M.E. 2006. Linking scales in stream ecology. Bioscience, 56(7): 591-597. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2006)56[591:LSISE]2.0.CO;2.
32. MacNally, M., Wallisand, E., and Lake, P.S. 2011. Geometry of biodiversity patterning: assemblages of benthic macroinvertebrates at tributary confluences. Aquat. Ecol. 45(1): 43-54. doi:10.1007/s10452-010-9322-z.
33. Melo, A.S. 2005. Effects of taxonomic and numeric resolution on the ability to detect ecological patterns at local scale using stream macroinvertebrates. Arch. Hydrobiol. 164(3): 309-323. doi:10.1127/0003-9136/2005/0164-0309.
34. Melo, A.S., and Froehlich, C.G. 2001. Macroinvertebrates in neotropical streams: richness patterns along a catchment and assemblage structure between 2 seasons. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc. 20(1): 1-16. doi:10.2307/1468184.
35. Merritt, R.W., and Cummins, K.W. 1996. An introduction to the aquatic insects of North America. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Iowa.
36. Nimer, E. 1989. Climatologia do Brasil. Fundação Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
37. Oksanen, J., Kindt, R., Legendre, P., O'hara, B., Simpson, G.L., Solymos, P., Stevens, M.H.H., and Wagner, H. 2010. Vegan: Community Ecology Package [online]. R package version 1.17-1. Available from http://cran.r-project.org/ package=vegan.
38. Overbeck, G.E., Müller, S.C., Fidelis, A., Pfadenhauer, J., Pillar, V.P., Blanco, C.C., Boldrini, I.I., Bothand, R., and Forneck, E.D. 2009. Os Campos Sulinos: um bioma negligenciado. In Campos Sulinos: conservação e uso sustentável da biodiversidade. Edited by V.P. Pillar, S.C. Müller, Z.M.S. Castilhos, and A.V.A. Jacques. Brasília-DF, Ministério do Meio Ambiante. pp. 26-41.
39. Poole, G.C. 2002. Fluvial landscape ecology: addressing uniqueness within the river discontinuum. Freshw. Biol. 48(4): 641-660. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2427. 2002.00922.x.
40. R Development Core Team. 2010. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing [online]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. Available from http://www.r-project.org.
41. Rice, S.P., Greenwood, M.T., and Joyce, C.B. 2001. Tributaries, sediment sources, and the longitudinal organisation of macroinvertebrate fauna along river systems. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 58(4): 824-840. doi:10.1139/f01-022.
42. Rice, S.P., Ferguson, R.I., and Hoey, T.B. 2006. Tributary control of physical heterogeneity and biological diversity at river confluences. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 63(11): 2553-2566. doi:10.1139/f06-145.
43. Rice, S.P., Kiffney, P., Greene, C., and Pess, G.R. 2008. The ecological importance of tributaries and confluences. In River Confluences, Tributaries and the Fluvial Network. Edited by S.P. Rice, A.G. Roy, and B.L. Rhoads. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 209-242.
44. Schneck, F., Schwarzbold, A., and Melo, A.S. 2011. Substrate roughness affects stream benthic algal diversity, assemblage composition, and nestedness. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc. 30(4): 1049-1056. doi:10.1899/11-044.1.
45. Soininen, J. 2010. Species turnover along abiotic and biotic gradients: patterns in space equal patterns in time? Bioscience, 60(6): 433-439. doi:10.1525/bio.2010. 60.6.7.
46. Svenning, J., Fløjgaardand, C., and Baselga, A. 2011. Climate, history and neutrality as drivers of mammal beta diversity in Europe: insights from multiscale deconstruction. J. Anim. Ecol. 80(2): 393-402. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2010. 01771.x. PMID:21070238.
47. Ulrich, W., and Gotelli, N.J. 2007. Null model analysis of species nestedness patterns. Ecology, 88(7): 1824-1831. doi:10.1890/06-1208.1. PMID:17645028.
48. Ulrich, W., Almeida-Neto, M., and Gotelli, N.J. 2009. A consumer's guide to nestedness analysis. Oikos, 118: 3-17. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0706.2008.17053.x.
49. Vannote, R.L., Minshall, G.W., Cummins, K.W., Sedell, J.R., and Cushing, C.E. 1980. The river continuum concept. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 37(1): 130-137. doi:10.1139/f80-017.
50. Warton, D.I., and Hudson, H.M. 2004. A MANOVA statistic is just as powerful as distance-based statistics, for multivariate abundances. Ecology, 85(3): 858-874. doi:10.1890/02-0419.
51. Wright, D.H., Patterson, B.D., Mikkelson, G.M., Cutler, A., and Atmar, W. 1997. A comparative analysis of nested subset patterns of species composition. Oecologia, 113(1): 1-20. doi:10.1007/s004420050348.