Citizen science approach reveals groundwater fauna in Switzerland and a new species of Niphargus (Amphipoda, Niphargidae)

Abstract

Knowledge on the diversity and distribution of subterranean organisms is still scattered, even in faunistically relatively well-researched countries such as Switzerland. This is mostly due to the restricted access to these subterranean habitats. Better knowledge on these organisms is needed, because they contribute substantially to overall biodiversity of a region, often contain unique elements of biodiversity, and can potentially be indicative of the ecological status of subterranean ecosystems that are providing important ecosystem services such as drinking water. Past research on subterranean organisms has often used highly specialised sampling techniques and expert knowledge. Here, we show that inclusion of non-professionals can be an alternative and highly promising sampling strategy. We retrieved citizen science-based samples from municipal groundwater wells across Switzerland, mainly from the Swiss Plateau. Opportunistic samples from 313 sites revealed a previously undocumented groundwater fauna including organisms from different major invertebrate groups, with a dominance of crustaceans. Here, we studied amphipods of the genus Niphargus. Among all 363 individuals sampled, we found in total eight nominal species. Two of them, namely N. fontanus and N. kieferi, are reported for Switzerland for the first time. We also found four further phylogenetic lineages that are potentially new species to science. One of them is here formally described as Niphargus arolaensissp. nov. The description is based on molecular and morphometric data. Our study proves the suitability of citizen science to document subterranean diversity, supports groundwater conservation efforts with data, and raises awareness for the relevance and biodiversity of groundwater amphipods among stakeholders.

A hotspot of groundwater amphipod diversity on a crossroad of evolutionary radiations

“…Finally, this study implies that similar approaches should be applied also in other regions, at least where species richness is high (Eme et al, 2018; Zagmajster et al, 2014). However, the generally scarce sampling of groundwater, with only few studies having similarly dense spatial resolution (Alther et al, 2021; Fišer et al, 2018; Flot et al, 2014; McInerney et al, 2014), makes such inclusions unlikely to happen in the near future. Thus, while we are still far from an optimal strategy on how to protect groundwater habitats, the numerous threats to groundwater (Mammola et al, 2019), such as hydropower dams or extensive water extraction, put an extra urge to strengthen and systematically organize future research on this topic, to make it implementable and effective.…”

Towards evidence‐based conservation of subterranean ecosystems

“…Examples of concrete interventions proposed include promoting awareness through artistic representations of caves and their biota (Danielopol, 1998), the use of simple narratives to engage children in the conservation of subterranean fauna (Mammola, Frigo & Cardoso, 2022), briefings to increase visitors' awareness about sensitive taxa [e.g. for divers in marine caves (Di Franco et al, 2009b;Guarnieri et al, 2012)], personal contact with target audiences (Alther et al, 2021), and the use of guided tours of caves to deliver an environmental education message (North & van Beynen, 2016). The latter example has received the most attention insofar as show caves represent unique windows for the general public to experience an inaccessible secluded world.…”

“…Environmental education encompasses all programs aimed at fostering environmentally related attitudes and developing awareness of biological conservation (Ardoin, Bowers & Gaillard, 2020). Moreover, education increases the success of other actions, such as citizen science‐aided data collection in groundwater systems (Alther et al ., 2021) and reporting of poaching events in caves (Simičević, 2017). While studies have emphasised the importance of these activities to enhance the long‐term preservation of subterranean biota and associated habitats, discussions on educational activities were often vague and lacked plans for practical implementation.…”

“…visual census, emergence count, mark–recapture studies, trapping), the use of indirect monitoring technologies (e.g. environmental DNA, acoustic monitoring, trail cameras with infrared sensors) (Mammola et al ., 2021a; Saccò et al ., 2022), and, most recently, subterranean citizen science (Alther et al ., 2021). Monitoring was by far the most recommended intervention in our database (Figs 2E, 4C) despite its effects being indirect – a pattern that is not exclusive to subterranean conservation (Buxton et al ., 2020, 2021).…”

Groundwater Monitoring through Citizen Science: A Review of Project Designs and Results

“…Information on the regional scale is available for 28 out of 33 cases. The distribution and total number of groundwater wells is typically rather low but varies a lot between the cases, from five monitoring wells (Walker et al 2016; Gowing et al 2020) to 313 sampling sites (Alther et al 2021). The number of wells depends here upon the resources available and the goal and nature of the study.…”