We studied the structure and population dynamics of zooplankton assemblages in the water bodies (eu-, para-, plesiopotamal and conjunctive water bodies) of a temperate floodplain during flood events. Here we report differences in the species composition of these water bodies in the two stages of flood pulses: rising vs. receding. During the receding period the proportion of larger and tychoplanktonic species increased. Similarity among zooplankton assemblages of these floodplain water bodies increased during the rising and decreased during the receding period. Species richness, diversity and population density values of zooplankton assemblages increased during the receding period in all types of water bodies except the eupotamal. The guild ratio of rotifer assemblages showed characteristic, but somewhat ambiguous changes. We conclude that the hydrological regime affects the structure and dynamics of zooplankton assemblages on the floodplain.
IntroductionSpatial and temporal variability induces high productivity and biodiversity in terrestrial and aquatic components of the river-floodplain systems (SHIEL et al., 1998;ARMITAGE et al., 2003). Understanding the ecological functions of natural river-floodplain systems is important to establish criteria to protect the biota of these sites (BERCZIK and BUZETZKY, 2006). Introduction of the Flood Pulse Concept (JUNK et al., 1989) stimulated renewed interest in the connection between large rivers and their floodplains; since then numerous studies have focused on the zooplankton of large rivers. These efforts have indicated that inshore retention and hydrological connectivity are a major determinant of zooplankton assembly (HEIN et al., 1999;BARANYI et al., 2002;RECKENDORFER et al., 1999;ZIMMERMANN-TIMM et al., 2007). In contrast, most hydro-ecological research projects on large rivers and their floodplains focus just on fish and/or benthic invertebrate assemblages, thus neglecting the importance of zooplankton communities in the food-web of river-floodplain systems. Concomitantly an assessment of their suitability as a biomonitoring tool is also neglected (BORJA et al., 2008;RESH, 2008