Advertisement

Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 17, Issue 9, pp 2247–2262 | Cite as

Prioritization of fish assemblages with a view to conservation and restoration on a large scale European basin, the Loire (France)

  • B. Bergerot
  • E. Lasne
  • T. Vigneron
  • P. Laffaille
Original Paper

Abstract

The hierarchical organization of important sites for the conservation or the restoration of fish communities is a great challenge for managers, especially because of financial or time constraints. In this perspective, we developed a methodology, which is easy to implement in different locations. Based on the fish assemblage characteristics of the Loire basin (France), we created a synthetic conservation value index including the rarity, the conservation status and the species origin. The relationship between this new synthetic index and the Fish-Based Index allowed us to establish a classification protocol of the sites along the Loire including fish assemblages to be restored or conserved. Sites presenting disturbed fish assemblages, a low rarity index, few threatened species, and a high proportion of non-native species were considered as important for the restoration of fish biodiversity. These sites were found mainly in areas where the assemblages are typical of the bream zone, e.g. with a higher number of eurytopic and limnophilic species. On the contrary, important sites for conservation were defined as having an important conservation potential (high RI, a lot of threatened species, and few non-natives fish species) and an undisturbed fish assemblage similar to the expected community if habitats are undisturbed. Important sites for conservation were found in the Loire basin’s medium reaches which host assemblages typical for the grayling and the barbell zones, e.g. with a higher number of rheophilic species. The synthetic conservation value index could be adapted and completed with other criteria according to management priorities and capacities.

Keywords

Hierarchical organization Ichthyofauna Disturbance Rarity index Origin index Conservation status 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the National French Fishing Council (ONEMA) which provided data. The study was supported by DIREN and Region Pays-de-la-Loire and by the Loire-Bretagne Water Agency.

References

  1. Aarts BGW, Nienhuis PH (2003) Fish zonation and guilds as the basis for the assessment of ecological integrity of large rivers. Hydrobiologia 500:157–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abell R (2002) Conservation biology for the biodiversity crisis : a freshwater follow-up. Conserv Biol 16(5):1435–1437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abellan P, Sanchez-Fernandez D, Velasco J, Millan A (2005) Conservation of freshwater biodiversity: a comparison of different area selection methods. Biodivers Conserv 14:3457–3474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allan JD, Flecker AS (1993) Biodiversity conservation in running waters. Biosciences 43(1):32–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aronson J, Clewell AF, Blignaut JN, Milton SJ (2006) Ecological restoration: A new frontier for nature conservation and economics. J Nat Conserv 14:135–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baisez A, Laffaille P (2005) Un outil d’aide à la gestion de l’anguille : le tableau de bord anguille du bassin Loire. Bull Fr Pêche Piscicole 378–379:115–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Canard A, Ysnel F (2000) Practical use of a single index to estimate the global range of rarity spider communities in western France. European Arachnology, Aarhus University Press, pp 171–176Google Scholar
  8. Carwardine J, Rochester WA, Richardson KS, Williams KJ, Pressey RL, Possingham HP (2007) Conservation planning with irreplaceability : does the method matter? Biodivers Conserv 16:245–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chovanec A, Hofer R, Schiemer F (2003) Fish as bioindicators. In: Markert BA, Breure AM, Zechmeiser HG (eds) Bioindicators and biomonitors, pp 639–675Google Scholar
  10. Collares-Pereira MJ, Cowx IG (2004) The role of catchment scale environmental management in freshwater fish conservation. Fish Manag Ecol 11:302–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Copp GH, Bianco PG, Bogutskaya NG, Eros T, Falka I, Ferreira MT, Fox MG, Freyhof J, Gozlan RE, Grabowska J, Kovac V, Moreno-Amich R, Naseka AM, Penaz M, Povz M, Przybylski M, Robillard M, Russell IC, Stakenas S, Sumer S, Vila-Gispert A, Wiesner C (2005) To be, or not to be, a non-native freshwater fish? J Appl Ichtyol 21:242–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cuizhang F, Jihua W, Jiakuan C, Qianhong W, Guangchun L (2003) Freshwater fish biodiversity in the Yangtze river basin of China: patterns, threats and conservation. Biodivers Conserv 12:1649–1685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Darwall WRT, Vié JC (2005) Identifying important sites for conservation of freshwater biodiversity: extending the species-based approach. Fish Manag Ecol 12:287–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Das A, Krishnaswamy J, Bawa KS, Kiran MC, Srinivas V, Kumar NS, Karanth KU (2006) Prioritisation of conservation areas in the Western Ghats, India. Biol Conserv 133:16–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dawson TP, Berry PM, Kampa E (2003) Climate change impacts on freshwater wetland habitats. J Nat Conserv 11:25–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dudgeon D, Arthington AH, Gessner MO, Kawabata ZI, Knowler DJ, Lévêque C, Naiman RJ, Prieur-Richard AH, Soto D, Stiassny MLJ, Sullivan CA (2006) Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biol Rev 81:163–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fattorini S (2006) A new method to identify important conservation areas applied to the butterflies of the Aegean Islands (Greece). Anim Conserv 9:75–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Galat DL, Zweimüller I (2001) Conservation large-river fishes: is the highway analogy an appropriate paradigm? J North Am Benthol Soc 20:266–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gibbs JP (2000) Wetland loss and biodiversity conservation. Conserv Biol 14(1):314–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gotelli NJ, Colwell RK (2001) Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecol Lett 4:379–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Guégan JF, Lek S, Oberdorff T (1998) Energy availability and habitat heterogeneity predict global riverine fish diversity. Nature 391:382–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Heino J (2002) Concordance of species richness patterns among multiple freshwater taxa: a regional perspective. Biodivers Conserv 11:137–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hickley P, Chare S (2004) Fisheries for non-native species in England and Wales: angling or the environment? Fish Manag Ecol 11:203–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Huet M (1959) Profiles and biology of western European streams as related to fish management. Trans Am Fish Soc 88:155–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ibarra A, Gevrey M, Park Y-S, Lim P, Sovan L (2003) Modelling the factors that influence fish guilds composition using a back-propagation network : assessment of metrics for indices of biotic integrity. Ecol Model 160:281–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ibarra A, Parks Y-S, Brosse S, Reyol Y, Lim P, Lek S (2005) Nested patterns of spatial diversity revealed for fish assemblages in a west European river. Ecol Freshw Fish 14:233–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kondolf GM, Boulton AJ, O’Daniel S, Poole GC, Rachel FJ, Stanley EH, Wohl E, Bang A, Carlstrom J, Cristoni C, Huber H, Koljonen S, Louhi P, Nakamura K (2006) Process-based ecological river restoration: Visualizing three-dimensional connectivity and dynamic vectors to recover lost linkages. Ecol Soc 11:5Google Scholar
  28. Laffaille P, Acou A, Guillouët J, Legault A (2005) Temporal changes in European eel, Anguilla anguilla, stocks in a small catchment after installation of fish passes. Fish Manag Ecol 12:123–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lasne E, Bergerot B, Lek S, Laffaille P (2007a) Fish zonation and indicator species for the evaluation of the ecological status of rivers: example of the Loire Basin (France). River Res Appl 23:877–890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lasne E, Lek S, Laffaille P (2007b) Patterns in fish assemblages in the Loire floodplain: The role of hydrological connectivity and implication for conservation. Biol Conserv 139:258–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lévêque C, Balian EV, Martens K (2005) An assessment of animal species diversity in continental waters. Hydrobiologia 542:39–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lima-Junior SE, Cardone IB, Goitein R (2006) Fish assemblage structure and aquatic pollution in a Brazilian stream: some limitation of diversity indices and models for environmental impact studies. Ecol Freshw Fish 15:284–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lytle DA, Poff NL (2004) Adaptation to natural flow regimes. Trends Ecol Evol 19:94–100PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Maes D, Bauwens D, De Bruyn L, Anselin A, Vermeersch G, Van Landuyt W, De Knijf G, Gilbert M (2005) Species richness coincidence: conservation strategies based on predictive modelling. Biodivers Conserv 14:1345–1364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Manchester S, Bullock JM (2000) The impacts of non-native species on UK biodiversity and the effectiveness of control. J Appl Ecol 37:845–864CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Margules CR, Pressey RL (2000) Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405:243–253PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, Da Fonseca GAB, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Noss RF (2000) High-risk ecosystems as foci for considering biodiversity and ecological integrity in ecological risk assessments. Environ Sci Policy 3:321–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Oberdorff T, Guilbert E, Lucchetta J-C (1993) Patterns of fish species richness in the Seine River basin, France. Hydrobiologia 259:157–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Oberdorff T, Guégan JF, Hugueny B (1995) Global scale patterns of fish species richness in rivers. Ecography 18:345–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Oberdorff T, Pont D, Hugueny B, Chessel D (2001) A probabilistic model characterizing riverine fish communities of French rivers : a framework for environmental assessment. Freshw Biol 46:399–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Oberdorff T, Pont D, Hugueny B, Porcher JP (2002) Development and validation of a fish-based index (FBI) for the assessment of “river health” in France. Freshw Biol 47:1720–1734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pawar S, Koo MS, Kelley C, Ahmed MF, Chaudhuri S, Sarkar S (2007) Conservation assessment and prioritization of areas in Northeast India: priorities for amphibians and reptiles. Biol Conserv. (in press) doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2006.12.012
  44. Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB, Karr JR, Prestegaard KL, Richter BD, Sparks RE, Stromberg JC (1997) The natural flow regime : a paradigm for river conservation and restoration. BioScience 47:769–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pringle C (2001) Hydrologic connectivity and the management of Biological reserves: a global perspective. Ecol Appl 11:981–998CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Quist MC, Rahel FJ, Hubert WA (2005) Hierarchical faunal filters: an approach to assessing effects of habitat and nonnative species on native fishes. Ecol Freshw Fish 14:24–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ricciardi A, Rasmussen JB (1999) Extinction rate of North America freshwater fauna. Conserv Biol 13(5):1220–1222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Saunders DL, Meeuwig JJ, Vincent ACJ (2002) Freshwater protected areas: strategies for conservation. Conserv Biol 16(1):30–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Seegert G (2000) Considerations regarding development of index of biotic integrity metrics for large rivers. Environ Sci Policy 3:99–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sόlymos P, Fehér Z (2005) Conservation prioritization based on distribution of land snails in Hungary. Conserv Biol 19(4):1084–1094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Szöllosi-Nagy A, Najilis P, Björklund G (1998) Assessing the world’s freshwater resources. Nat Resour 34:8–18Google Scholar
  52. Tetzlaff D, Soulsby C, Bacon PJ, Youngson AF, Gibbins C, Malcolm IA (2007) Connectivity between landscapes and riverscapes: a unifying theme in integrating hydrology and ecology in catchment science? Hydrol Processes 21:1385–1389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Turpie JK (1995) Prioritizing South African estuaries for conservation: A practical example using waterbirds. Biol Conserv 74:175–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Verneaux J (1981) Fish and the quality of streams. An Sci Univ F Comté biol Anim 4(2):33–41Google Scholar
  55. Welcomme RL, Winemiller KO, Cowx IG (2006) Fish environmental guilds as a tool for assessment of ecological condition of river. River Res Appl 22:377–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ward JV, Tockner K, Uehlinger U, Malard F (2001) Understanding natural patterns and processes in river corridors as the basis for effective river restoration. Regul Rivers Res Manag 17:311–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ward JV (1998) Riverine landscapes: biodiversity patterns, disturbance regimes, and aquatic conservation. Biol Conserv 83:269–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Williams P, Gibbons D, Margules C, Rebelo A, Humphries C, Pressey R (1996) A comparison of richness hotspots, rarity hotspots, and complementary areas for conserving diversity of British birds. Conserv Biol 10(1):155–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Young TP (2000) Restoration ecology and conservation biology. Biol Conserv 92:73–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. Bergerot
    • 1
  • E. Lasne
    • 1
  • T. Vigneron
    • 2
  • P. Laffaille
    • 1
  1. 1.ERT 52–Bâtiment 25 ‘biodiversité fonctionnelle et gestion des territoires’University of Rennes 1Rennes CedexFrance
  2. 2.Conseil Supérieur de la PêcheCesson SevigneFrance

Personalised recommendations